MONEY Love and Money

What Fifty Shades Gets Wrong About Money and Sex

FIFTY SHADES OF GREY
Chuck Zlotnick—Focus Features/Courtesy Everett Collection

The hit novel turned film suggests wealth makes men sexy to women. That's misleading.

Does money make men more attractive to women? On the surface, both popular culture and social science research seem to say yes.

You can’t take a step into the academic literature without tripping over a study showing that women place higher value than men on a partner’s wealth, that women are more attracted to men with nice cars, or that women orgasm more with rich partners.

The standard social science explanation for this phenomenon gets expressed in evolutionary terms: Because impregnating as many women as possible gives a man’s genes an evolutionary advantage, men are more superficial and promiscuous. Conversely, because of the time and energy required for a single pregnancy, women are choosier and more preoccupied with finding a mate rich with resources to provide for offspring. Or, at least, that’s the theory.

The success of the Fifty Shades of Grey franchise certainly does little to dispel all this. The story—for those living under a rock—details the sexual awakening of a young woman seduced by a billionaire, whose physical attractiveness is matched only by his fleet of luxury cars, helicopter, penthouse apartment, and cushy CEO job running his own company. In other words, as author E.L. James has put it, Christian Grey is “every woman’s dream.”

“He’s very good looking, he’s very good at sex, he’s disgustingly rich,” she told TIME.

To be fair, it’s intuitive that a partner with means is more desirable than one without, all else being equal. A recent poll found that 78% of coupled Americans of both sexes say they’d prefer a partner who is good with money over one who’s physically attractive. And if you are a man who feels pressure to impress women with your money, or a woman who felt titillated reading about Christian Grey’s alpha status, you probably buy into the theory without even realizing it.

But as it turns out, this popular narrative about men, women, sex, and money isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

A recent study has found that the common depiction of women primarily seeking out rich and powerful men (and men seeking out young and attractive women) is fairly uncommon in practice and—crucially—doesn’t reflect the reality of successful relationships or what actually makes people happy.

The research, by University of Notre Dame sociologist Elizabeth McClintock, has found that gender differences more or less disappear when you discard self-reported attraction scores and instead examine how real couples pursue one another, date, and settle down. In reality, rich women are just as likely as rich men to use their status to snag a more-attractive mate. And across the board, relationships in which people are essentially trading status for sex tend to be uncommon and short-lived.

Instead, McClintock found that the biggest force that predicts a successful match between people is actually how well all of your qualities match up. That means, for example, that people of similar physical appeal tend to pair off, and those with comparable educations and financial means are drawn together.

What’s perhaps counterintuitive, then, is that a woman seeking a rich man is actually better off getting herself a raise than a makeover. Likewise, a man seeking an attractive lady will see higher returns investing in a gym membership than a brokerage account.

So why does the tale of the rich, experienced man seducing the pretty ingenue persist in popular imagination, not to mention the academic literature? McClintock found that many existing studies took for granted the very gender roles they were supposed to be measuring, examining only women’s attractiveness and men’s status or money, while ignoring men’s appearance and the wealth and education of women.

As Northwestern University psychologist Eli Finkel told New York magazine: “Scientists are humans, too, and we can be inadvertently blinded by beliefs about how the world works.”

Indeed, we’re all better off disposing of our blindfolds—even if they’re made of the finest satin.

 

TIME Innovation

Five Best Ideas of the Day: February 20

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

1. Hollywood’s diversity problem goes beyond “Selma.” Asian and Latino stories and faces are missing.

By Jose Antonio Vargas and Janet Yang in the Los Angeles Times

2. Shifting the narrative away from religion is key to defeating ISIS.

By Dean Obeidallah in the Daily Beast

3. Innovation alone won’t fix social problems.

By Amanda Moore McBride and Eric Mlyn in the Chronicle of Higher Education

4. When the Ebola epidemic closed schools in Sierra Leone, radio stepped in to fill the void.

By Linda Poon at National Public Radio

5. The racial wealth gap we hardly talk about? Retirement.

By Jonnelle Marte in the Washington Post

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME Food & Drink

This Caviar May Be the Most Expensive Food in the World

At $114,000 a kilo, this dish is not for everyone

A fish farmer in Austria is offering a caviar dish that he says is worth $114,000 per kilo.

The white caviar “Strottarga Bianco” concoction includes rare albino sturgeon dried roe sprinkled with gold leaf, according to the website for Walter Gruell’s fish farm. The dish is only available on customer order.

“It is certainly not a product for everyone, but there is definitely a market for extremely exclusive products especially when they are something new,” said Gruell’s son Patrick, who helped develop the caviar, according to Yahoo News.

According to the Guinness World Records, the most expensive food on record is also a caviar: Almas, from the Iranian Beluga fish, sells for roughly $35,000 per kilogram.

TIME White House

Here Are the 10 Richest Presidents in American History

Who brought the most green to the White House?

You may know a lot about our 44 commanders-in-chief, but do you know how big their bank accounts were?

Watch the video above to see which presidents brought the most green to the White House.

TIME Research

There’s a Growing Health Gap Between Rich and Poor Teens

International efforts to improve health for the under-5-year-olds are not being matched for older children, a new study reveals

Disparities in health between rich and poor adolescents grew globally during the first decade of this century, according to a survey conducted in 34 countries in Europe and North America.

The study, published in the Lancet, reports that “socioeconomic differences across multiple areas of adolescent mental and physical health increased between 2002 and 2010.”

According to the research, adolescents from the most impoverished socioeconomic groups are more likely to suffer from poor health thanks to diminished physical activity and larger body mass indices.

“A strong international focus on reducing child poverty and mortality in children under five years has not been matched by a similar response in older age groups, resulting in widening socioeconomic inequalities in adolescent health,” says Frank Elgar, a psychiatry professor at McGill University in Montreal.

Researchers behind the study relied on data compiled from 500,000 young people from across Europe and North America who participated in a World Health Organization survey.

[Science Daily]

TIME Davos

What Obama and Davos Plutocrats Have in Common

A logo sits on a glass panel inside the venue of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland on Jan. 19, 2015.
Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg—Getty Images A logo sits on a glass panel inside the venue of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland on Jan. 19, 2015.

Global wealth has changed dramatically. It's time our tax code should, too

If President Obama’s State of the Union speech Tuesday night and the chatter at the World Economic Forum in Davos, which opened Wednesday, are any indication, inequality will be the hot economic topic for another year running.

The president’s proposals for changes to parts of the US tax code that mainly benefit the wealthy revives the conversation Warren Buffett started a few years back with his op-ed about why his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. (Answer: She works for wages, whereas the Oracle of Omaha earns money on money itself, in the form of capital gains, interest income, etc.) At the WEF in Davos, where world leaders meet every year to hash out the big geopolitical and economic issues of the day, one of the most talked about reports is Oxfam’s new brief looking at how the 85 richest people on the planet have the same amount of wealth as the poorest 50%, a huge jump from last year when it took a full 388 plutocrats to equal that wealth. Some 20% of the billionaires come from the world of finance and insurance, a group whose wealth increased by 11 % in the last twelve months. And $550 million of it was spent lobbying policy makers in places like Washington, something Oxfam believes has been a major barrier to tax and intellectual property reform that creates a fairer economic system.

Plenty of those plutocrats are here on the Magic Mountain, and some are undoubtedly checking in with their tax planners. I expect that we’ll hear lots more in Davos this week about how to restructure tax codes for the 21st century, mainly because the nature of wealth and how it gets created has changed so dramatically. Today, more than ever since the Gilded Age, money begets money; income earned from wages has been stagnating for years, or decades even, depending on which type of workers you tally. Meanwhile, changes in the tax code and corporate compensation over the last 30 years or so has concentrated more financial resources at the very top of the socio-economic food chain. Indeed, financial assets (stocks, bonds, and such) are the dominant form of wealth for the top 0.1 %, which actually creates a snowball effect of inequality.

As French economist Thomas Piketty explained so thoroughly in his now famous 693 page tome on wealth inequality, Capital in the 21st Century, the returns on financial assets greatly out-weigh those from income earned the old-fashioned way—by working for wages. Even when you consider the salaries of the modern economy’s super-managers—the CEOs, bankers, accountants, agents, consultants and lawyers that groups like Occupy Wall Street railed against—it’s important to remember that somewhere between 30% to 80 % of their incomes are awarded not in cash but in stock options and stock equity. This type of income is taxed at a much lower rate than what most of us pay on the money we receive in our regular checks. That means the composition of super-manager pay has the booster-rocket effect of lowering taxes (and thus governments’ ability to provide support for the poor and middle classes) while increasing inequality in the economy as a whole.

MORE How 7 ideas in the State of the Union would affect you

It’s a cycle that spins faster and faster as executives paid in stock make short-term business decisions that might undermine long-term growth in their companies even as they raise the value of their own options in the near. It’s no accident that corporate stock buybacks, which tend to bolster share prices but not underlying growth (you know, the kind that creates jobs for you and me), and corporate pay have gone up concurrently over the last four decades. There are any number of studies that illustrate the intersection between the markets, our tax system, and wealth gap; one of the most striking was done by economists James Galbraith and Travis Hale, who showed how during the late 1990s, changing income inequality tracked the go-go NASDAQ stock index to a remarkable degree.

As Piketty’s work shows, in the absence of some change-making event, like a war or a Great Depression that destroys financial asset value, the rich really do get richer–a lot richer–while the rest of us become relatively worse off. One of the few levers that governments have to combat this trend is the tax code. While Piketty argues for a global wealth tax, something that will likely never happen, President Obama’s stab at capital gains taxes and trust taxes is probably just the opening round in a tax debate that will go on throughout this year, and into the 2016 presidential race.

I say, bring it on—given that the nature of wealth has changed, it’s high time the tax system should too.

MONEY consumer psychology

7 Ways to Trick Yourself into Saving More Money in 2015

piggy bank in various clamps and a vice
Steve Greer—Getty Images

These simple strategies can help you squeeze more out of your budget—and end the year with a lot more cash socked away than you started with.

If your New Year’s resolutions included growing—or starting—your savings, you’re already ahead of the pack.

Only about a third of Americans recently surveyed by Fidelity made any kind of financial resolution this year; and of those who did, just over half were aiming to stash more cash.

Kudos to you for taking this important step toward financial security.

Want to make sure your good intentions aren’t derailed before the month is out? The key is taking initial actions that will make repeating good habits easier, says University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler.

“We tend to revert to our long-run tendencies,” says Thaler. “To effect real changes, you have to make some structural change in the environment.”

With that wisdom in mind, the seven life changes that follow will help you save more money this year.

1. Use Inertia to Your Advantage

Research by Thaler and others has shown that people are victims of inertia: If you aren’t used to saving money with regularity, it’s likely going to feel like such a chore to start that you’ll never bother—or, you’ll quit after one account transfer.

But when your money is already being saved automatically, inertia works in your favor, since it’ll take more effort to stop saving than to do nothing. That is why a growing number of 401(k) plans offer automatic enrollment with a default monthly contribution rate.

Still, you may need to stick a hand in the machine if you want to have financial freedom in retirement, since the default rate (often around 3% of salary) won’t get you far in your golden years. Most planners recommend saving at least 10% of income.

Even if you set up your own plan, you probably haven’t touched your contribution rate since; more than a third of participants haven’t, according to a TIAA-CREF survey.

You can benefit from another relatively new feature called “auto-escalation.” Offered by nearly half of companies, auto-escalation lets you set your savings rate to bump up annually at a date of your choosing and to an amount of your choosing.

For other savings accounts, harness your own “good” inertia by setting up automatic transfers on payday from checking to savings (if you don’t see the money, you won’t get attached to it). Better yet, ask your HR department if you can split your direct deposit to multiple accounts.

2. Keep Your Eye on One Prize

Setting up automatic savings works well if your income and expenses are predictable; but what if either or both aren’t set in stone? You can save money as you go, but you’ll be more successful if you narrow your objectives.

Research from the University of Toronto found that savers often feel overwhelmed by the number of goals they need to put away money for—a stress that can lead to failure. Thinking about multiple objectives forces people to consider tradeoffs, leaving them waffling over choices instead of taking action.

One solution? Prioritize your goals, then knock out one at a time. If you know you need to contribute $5,000 to your retirement funds this year, focus on completing that first. Once it’s done, move on to saving for that dream home.

Another strategy is to think about your goals as interconnected; participants in the Toronto study were also able to overcome their uncertainty about saving when they integrated their objectives into an umbrella goal. So, for example, if you are saving for both a car and a vacation, consider setting up a “road trip” fund.

3. Focus on the Future

A part of what keeps people from saving is that we don’t connect our future aspirations with our present selves, research shows.

One way to get around that is by running some numbers on your retirement using a calculator like T. Rowe Price’s. When participants in a study by the National Bureau of Economic Research were sent exact figures showing how retirement savings contributions translated into income in retirement, they increased their annual contributions by more than $1,000 on average.

Another easy trick? Download an app like AgingBooth, which will show you how you’ll look as a geezer. One study showed that interacting with a virtual reality image of yourself in old age can make you better at saving.

This trick can work for more than just retirement. Another study found that when savers were sent visual reminders of their savings goals, they ended up with more cash stored up. Consider leaving photos of your goal (e.g., images of your children or dream home) next to the computer where you do your online banking to cue you to put more away.

4. Ignore Raises and Bonuses

As Harvard professor Sendhil Mullainathan has said, the biggest problem with getting a bonus is it’ll likely make you want to celebrate and spend it all—plus some.

The windfall creates an “abundance shock,” which gives you a misleading sense of freedom.

The simplest solution to this problem is to pretend you never got the raise or bonus in the first place, and to instead direct that new money into savings right away. (Remember the 401(k) auto-escalation tip? Set your contribution to bump up the week you get your raise.)

The same goes for when you return an item to a store for a refund or get a transportation reimbursement check in the mail. The faster you put extra cash into savings, the faster you’ll forget about spending it.

5. Make it Contractual

Carrots and sticks work.

One study asked smokers who were trying to quit to save money in an account for six months; at the end of the period, if a urine test showed them free of nicotine, the money was theirs. If not, the cash was donated to charity.

Surprise, surprise: People who participated in the savings account were more likely to have been cigarette-free at the six-month mark than a control group.

If you’re the type who responds to disincentives, enlist a buddy who can help you enforce upon yourself some kind of punishment if you don’t live up to your savings goal (e.g., you might promise a roommate that you’ll clean the bathroom for six weeks).

Maybe you respond better to positive feedback? Simply having a supportive friend or relative to report to on a set schedule may help you achieve results, as many of those who have participated in a group weight loss program like Weight Watchers can attest. Or you might look for some (non-monetary) way to reward yourself if successful.

You can use the website Stickk.com—inspired by the aforementioned study on smokers—to set up a commitment contract that involves incentives or disincentives.

6. Keep Impulses from Undoing Your Budget

Setting aside cash is only half of the equation when it comes to saving more: It’s just as important to keep spending under control.

Most people know to shop carefully—and early—for big-ticket items like cars or airline tickets (which are cheapest 49 days before you’re due to fly). But the premium for procrastinating on smaller items can also add up: Studies show that people spend more on last-minute purchases partly because shopping becomes a defensive act, focused on avoiding disappointment vs. getting the best value.

So give yourself plenty of time to research any item you’re planning to buy. And always go shopping with a list.

When you see an item that tempts you to diverge from your list, give yourself a 24-hour cooling-off period. Ask a sales clerk to keep the item on hold. Or, put it in your online shopping cart, until the same time tomorrow (chances are, that e-tailer will send you a coupon).

Or you could try this trick that MONEY writer Brad Tuttle uses to determine whether an item is worthy of his dough: Pick a type of purchase you love—in his case, burritos—and use that as a unit of measurement. For example, if you see a $120 shirt you like, you can ask yourself, “Is this really worth 10 burritos?” Likewise, you could measure the cost of an item in terms of how many hours of work you had to put in to earn the money to pay for it.

Also, since gift-shopping procrastination undoes a lot of people’s budgets, you might think about starting a spreadsheet where you can jot down ideas for presents year-round. That way, someone’s birthday rolls around, you can shop for a specific item on price rather than spending out of desperation.

Finally, remember that “anchor” prices can bias us to be thrifty or extravagant. So when you are shopping for products that range widely in price (like clothes or cars), start by inspecting cheaper items before viewing pricier ones. That way your brain will stay “anchored” to lower prices, and view the costlier options with more scrutiny.

7. Force Yourself to Feel Guilty

Surveys show that about a third of people don’t check their credit card statements every month.

That’s a problem, and not only because vigilance is your best defense against extraneous charges or credit card fraud. Seeing your purchases enumerated can also help reign in spending by making you feel guilty—one of many reasons people avoid looking.

Another perk of staying up-to-date with your bills: It makes you more aware of paying for redundant services, like Geico and AAA car insurance or Netflix and Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus.

Keep in mind that shaving off a recurring monthly payment gives you 12x the bump in savings. So a few of these expenses could boost your annual savings by a few hundred bucks. That’s a lot of burritos.

More on resolutions:

Read next: These Types of People End Up More Successful and Make More Money

Listen to the most important stories of the day.

TIME Economics

Richest 1% to Boast More Wealth Than Rest of World by 2016

In 2014, the bottom 80% controlled only 5.5% of the world's wealth

Global income inequality is headed for a new milestone with the world’s richest 1% on track to control more wealth than everyone else on the planet by 2016, according to an Oxfam International report released Monday.

The charity also warns that spiraling inequality hampers the fight against global poverty at a time when 1 in 9 people does not have enough to eat and more than a billion people still live on less than $1.25 per day.

“Oxfam’s report is just the latest evidence that inequality has reached shocking extremes, and continues to grow. It is time for the global leaders of modern capitalism, in addition to our politicians, to work to change the system to make it more inclusive, more equitable and more sustainable,” said Oxfam International executive director Winnie Byanyima.

In 2014, the ultra-rich first percentile held 48% of the world’s income. By contrast, the poorest 80% of the world’s population only controlled a paltry 5.5% of its wealth, according to the report.

The study was published a day before U.S. President Barack Obama is expected to announce a significant middle-class tax cut at his State of the Union address.

TIME russia

7 Western Assets Owned (for Now) by Russian Billionaires

Will the tanking Russian economy prompt its billionaires to shed their high profile holdings in the U.S. and Europe?

Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov is reportedly looking for a buyer for the NBA basketball team he bought five years ago, amid speculation that the his country’s shrinking economy may have squeezed his finances.

The 49-year-old businessman, worth roughly $11.1 billion, wants to unload the Brooklyn Nets, Bloomberg reports. A spokesman for Prokhorov told Bloomberg that the team is open to sale offers.

There are many reasons that Prokhorov, the first foreign owner of an NBA team, could be considering a sale. The team has suffered a dismal start to the season after a poor record last year, sinking his plans for a spot in the championships within five years. The team has also lost about $144 million in the last year, according to ESPN.

The billionaire may also be capitalizing on an apparently hot market for NBA teams after former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer bought the Los Angeles Clippers last year for a record $2 billion. The Nets have been valued at around $1.3 billion, which means a sale could net Prokhorov nearly $1 billion in profits from his original, $220 million stake.

But as the Russian economy crumbles under falling oil prices and tough Western sanctions, the nation’s business elite are feeling the pressure. Last month alone, Russia’s richest 20 people — Prokhorov included — lost a combined $10 billion as the value of the ruble tumbled. They lost a combined $62 billion across the year, according to the analysis by Bloomberg.

And Prokhorov’s not alone. Russian billionaires have snapped up marquee items in Europe and the U.S., from sports teams to properties. There are growing fears that the downturn in Russia may prompt some of them to sell off their properties to cover losses.

Here’s a look at some of the highest profile assets owned by Russian oligarchs.

  • The Brooklyn Nets

    General view as fans watch a tip-off between the Brooklyn Nets and Orlando Magic at the Barclays Center on Nov. 9, 2014 in Brooklyn, New York.
    Alex Goodlett—Getty Images General view as fans watch a tip-off between the Brooklyn Nets and Orlando Magic at the Barclays Center on Nov. 9, 2014 in Brooklyn, New York.

    Mikhail Prokhorov, the seventh-richest Russian and the 107th richest person in the world, bought the team and a share of the team’s new Brooklyn arena, the Barclays Center, in 2010 (according to Bloomberg, his share of the arena is not for sale). The team made it to the playoffs in 2013 but still have little to show for high profile acquisitions of aging stars Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett.

  • Arsenal

    Arsenal players celebrate victory with mascot Gunnersauraus Rex after the FA Cup with Budweiser Final match between Arsenal and Hull City at Wembley Stadium on May 17, 2014 in London.
    Clive Mason—Getty Images Arsenal players celebrate victory with mascot Gunnersauraus Rex after the FA Cup with Budweiser Final match between Arsenal and Hull City at Wembley Stadium on May 17, 2014 in London.

    In 2007, Alisher Usmanov bought an initial stake in the Arsenal Football Club and now owns about 30% of the team. The Gunners won an FA Cup title last year after a nearly decade long drought, but 2014 wasn’t all good news for Usmanov, who lost the title of richest man in Russia to Viktor Vekselberg.

  • 15 Central Park West

    15 Central Park West, a luxury condominium building, stands in New York, U.S., on Jan. 6, 2009.
    Bloomberg/Getty Images 15 Central Park West, a luxury condominium building, stands in New York, U.S., on Jan. 6, 2009.

    The record-breaking $88 million purchase of a penthouse on Central Park West in New York City in 2012 was linked to Dmitry Rybolovlev, who made his fortune in the fertilizer industry. But Rybolovlev, worth $10.2 billion, could lose the property in an ugly and very expensive divorce settlement; in May, a Swiss court ordered him to pay a record-breaking $4.5 billion this year.

  • AS Monaco

    Yannick Ferreira Carrasco of Monaco shoots at goal during the French Ligue 1 match between AS Monaco FC and LOSC Lille at Louis II Stadium on Aug. 30, 2014 in Monaco,
    Kaz Photography/Getty Images Yannick Ferreira Carrasco of Monaco shoots at goal during the French Ligue 1 match between AS Monaco FC and LOSC Lille at Louis II Stadium on Aug. 30, 2014 in Monaco,

    Dmitry Rybolovlev lives in Monaco, where he has owned a majority stake in the local soccer team since 2011 and helped the red and white bounce back from a lengthy slump to be one of Europe’s strongest competitors — and biggest spenders. Could a record-setting divorce settlement representing half his fortune (though he’s still contesting the court’s ruling) and the effects of the dropping ruble push Rybolovlev to change that approach?

  • Star Island estate

    Single family homes on Star Island and the Venetian Islands are seen June 3, 2014 in Miami.
    Joe Raedle—Getty Images Single family homes on Star Island and the Venetian Islands are seen June 3, 2014 in Miami.

    Russian Vodka tycoon Roustam Tariko spent $25.5 million for an estate on Miami Beach’s Star Island in 2011, the largest Miami Beach sale in more than half a decade.

  • Chelsea F.C.

    Diego Costa of Chelsea celebrates with team-mates after scoring his team's second goal during the Barclays Premier League match between Chelsea and Newcastle United at Stamford Bridge on Jan. 10, 2015 in London.
    Richard Heathcote—Getty Images Diego Costa of Chelsea celebrates with team-mates after scoring his team's second goal during the Barclays Premier League match between Chelsea and Newcastle United at Stamford Bridge on Jan. 10, 2015 in London.

    Roman Abramovich shattered the record price paid for British soccer teams in 2003 when he paid $233 million for Chelsea FC. The steel tycoon, today Russia’s fourth wealthiest man, poured money into the team — until it made a profit last year — and helped it become one of the best in Europe. The team has won three Premier League titles as well as Europe’s Champions League under Abramovich’s ownership. While Abramovich’s fortune has shrunk by nearly two percent in the past year according to Bloomberg, representing a loss of more than 200 million dollars, he has given no indication of wanting to sell the team.

  • One Hyde Park

    One Hyde Park is seen London on May 2, 2014.
    Paul Hackett—Reuters One Hyde Park is seen London on May 2, 2014.

    Foreigners, including suspected Russian oligarchs, swooped in to buy up apartments in One Hyde Park, London’s most exclusive — and most expensive — residential tower. Some of the owners’ identities have been confirmed, like Ukrainian billionaire Rinat Akhmetov, who spent $220 million on an apartment. That was a record high spent in the U.K., until it was surpassed by another One Hyde Park buyer. But in the wake of the rubles plummet, Russian buyers in London’s luxury market have all but vanished, brokers told Bloomberg News last month.

TIME Economy

Wealth Gap Widens Between Whites and Minorities

The gap between white and black household wealth is the highest since 1989

The wealth disparity of U.S. households has widened dramatically along racial and ethnic lines during the recovery from the economic recession, according to a new report.

In 2007, at the start of the recession, white households in the U.S. had a net worth 10 times that of black households. But in 2013, white households were 13 times richer, according to the Pew Research Report out Friday. White households were eight times richer than Hispanic households in 2007 but 10 times richer in 2013.

FT_14.12.11_wealthGapRatios

Researchers note that while wealth of non-Hispanic white households increased a small amount between 2010 and 2013—2.4%—the wealth of Hispanic and black households actually fell dramatically, 14% for Hispanic households and 34% for black households.

Other racial and ethnic minorities were not broken out for analysis in the data compiled by Pew.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser