Lots of good debate here and especially here on Kevin’s post about the recent study on how young women in their 20s and 30s now out-earn men in New York, Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston, Chicago and Minneapolis.
Now add this to the mix: A 2005 study by Columbia University economist, Lisa Edlund found that while young women outnumber young men in most urban areas of the world, men out earn women at all ages in most of these cities. She attributes the difference to the “asymmetries of the marriage market.” Men, she writes, “pay women for marriage” – that is, for the relatively higher costs women occur in having and raising children.
From a strictly economic perspective, I think this means cities are now better places for young women than young men. What say you?
August 9th, 2007 at 11:22 am
If young women outnumber men in cities, it may be in large part because young men have greater opportunities in non-urban jobs.
This might be a western-Canadian bias (where resource-based employment is strong), but young men seem much more drawn to working in logging camps, in the oil sands and on oil drilling rigs, in the fishing industry, etc.
Over time, many make some good money but eventually decide to move to the city — whether for a more white-collar career, or to get married and start a family, etc.
That’s my theory. If I find some stats to back it up, I’ll post something on my blog.