vestigations had been done, and this could help us find out why is there such a difference. There are many findings and true testimonies that had been showed. Income distribution is the result of the interplay of many forces. But no single study can hope to include all the factors that are related to that distribution. The role of certain factors such as health, intelligence, ambition, and even family connections, cannot be readily measured (Miller, pg.1). An attempt has been made to describe the variability of income in terms of geographic location, occupational differentials, age, sex education etc.
             In California as of 1989, the wages of Mexican American men were on average 25% lower than the wages of white men. Mexican American wage deficit widened during the 1980's particularly for Mexican American among third and higher generation workers throughout the United States. The wage gap between Mexican American men and white men grew by 8 points (from 14%to 22%). Mexican origin women earned 50% as much as white women and 45% as much as white men (Miller, pg 107). The earnings of Mexican American women are the most adversely affected of all gender and ethnic groups. This changes reflect the fact that earning inequality and wage premiums paid to more educated and skilled workers were increasing over this period. And Chicanos were the less educated and skilled workers. Also this difference could be attributable to Chicanos loosing ground to low-skill, low-wage white. The educational disadvantage of Mexican American workers is the principal reason why they earn less than of other United States workers. Differences unobservable indicator of skill in this case, age and years of schooling, explain from one half to three quarters of wage gaps between Mexican American and white workers. With schooling accounting for most of the difference. Today U.S born Chicano men average a year and a half less education than white men. Chicano men ar...