Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
None of this is entirely news to those following the economy.
GOP and or lovers of DT will hail this as some sort of vindication of their policies. Maybe, but one huge *not* as well.
For a good part of past decade the USA along with much of Europe and elsewhere was in a serious recession that almost became another great economic depression. Employers used that period (if not before) to go "lean" and extract as much productivity per worker possible, all without raising wages much if not at all.
What finally has happened is what those from Obama administration/period long predicted; rather than the surplus of unemployed during great recession, the pendulum has swung the other way. Employers now are finding they cannot get any more blood out of stones as it were, and thus are forced to hire employees.
But wait there is more; because experienced/good employees can now write their own tickets employers must pay more to attract and retain.
In first part of the recovery employers largely relied upon nabbing employees from other firms, and some of that still is going on. But that pool is shrinking for many reasons, so employers are now left with the dreaded option of having to pay more. Sadly for them many employees are saying "I don't get out of bed and **** for that kind of money", so either the offer goes up, or position is not filled.
All this is playing against a backdrop of baby boom generation entering retirement years. This along with a shrinking workforce population (those actively seeking employment) which oddly (and rather alarmingly) is still stubbornly strong with white males of prime working age.
Inflation? How fast or if that number moves depends upon how much if any higher wage costs businesses pass along to consumers. It could be mitigated by a decrease in oil prices or other factors.
As for the Federal Reserve, this improving jobs/wage picture means the US economy is not only largely back to normal, but gaining steam. As such rate increase are all but certain to follow. There simply aren't many reasons (if any) to prolong the low to nil interest rate environment of past. This despite Wall Street and many others (including it seems His Orangeness) are addicted to free money flowing out of the Fed.
You've got that backwards. The figures are right boradly. They may not, however, explain your situation well.
There's a geographical component to this that many people miss or discount. Between tax bite + COL metrics $1 is worth far less in NYC, Boston, NOVA, DC, SF, San Jose, LA, Seattle, Portland etc. than Atlanta, Dallas, KCMO, Houston etc.
The cadre of people really getting hammered are those in the bottom couple of income quintiles and some in the third who live in SF, San Jose, NYC and LA in particular. "Real" poverty rates in NY and CA are off the charts.
People at the very bottom of the wage scale are screwed no matter where they go. They are, however, less living in places that cost less to live.
Yes, I know that income, wages, and the cost of living is dependent upon where you live. I also know that the cheaper places to live also have fewer jobs and those jobs pay less money. If that wasn't the case, people would be flocking by the millions to say, Cowville, Iowa, so they could make their $300,000 a year in the high tech jobs there and live in those $90,000 houses that are for sale.
Except that there are no high tech jobs in Cowville that pay $300,000 a year and if there were, the houses would then cost upwards of half a million bucks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein
Now if only I could pay market rate for healthcare instead of market rate + me subsidizing the poor and/or unhealthy...
Awwww...I'm so sorry I insist on living. OK, honestly, I'm not sorry. Truth is, there are some people in this world that are worth dying for. You just aren't one of them.
Yes, I know that income, wages, and the cost of living is dependent upon where you live. I also know that the cheaper places to live also have fewer jobs and those jobs pay less money. If that wasn't the case, people would be flocking by the millions to say, Cowville, Iowa, so they could make their $300,000 a year in the high tech jobs there and live in those $90,000 houses that are for sale.
Except that there are no high tech jobs in Cowville that pay $300,000 a year and if there were, the houses would then cost upwards of half a million bucks.
Awwww...I'm so sorry I insist on living. OK, honestly, I'm not sorry. Truth is, there are some people in this world that are worth dying for. You just aren't one of them.
This has way less to do with Cowville than the scarcity of the 150 IQ workers capable of doing that $300k tech job. A Cisco Fellow makes about $300k. I’ve worked with a few of them over the years. There aren’t that many people that bright walking around on the planet. The people like that cluster in the high COL places with the top employers and top universities.
A good software engineer in Boston makes $200k to $250k. A modest house in a town with a good school system with a reasonable commute is now north of $1 million. That’s unaffordable on $200k unless your wife has a similar job. Bay Area housing math is even worse. A shack in a sketchy town like Sunnyvale is $1.25 million.
My house jumped in value 11% in the past year
Yay for me, although that means my property tax bill will increase. It's that much harder for people who don't have housing to get it.
This has way less to do with Cowville than the scarcity of the 150 IQ workers capable of doing that $300k tech job. A Cisco Fellow makes about $300k. I’ve worked with a few of them over the years. There aren’t that many people that bright walking around on the planet. The people like that cluster in the high COL places with the top employers and top universities.
A good software engineer in Boston makes $200k to $250k. A modest house in a town with a good school system with a reasonable commute is now north of $1 million. That’s unaffordable on $200k unless your wife has a similar job. Bay Area housing math is even worse. A shack in a sketchy town like Sunnyvale is $1.25 million.
Part of the reason for the lack of 150 IQ workers is the education system and the new business models.
I remember listening to Dr. Bill Wattenburg talk about what the future of California was going to look like since they started charging tuition at the state and community colleges. Without bright young people to enter the workforce, he thought the state might crash and burn. Well, he was right. People simply can't afford to go to college and get an education anymore. And I don't care how many grants or scholarships are out there, there aren't enough for everyone who wants to go. And companies are starting to feel that.
The other problem is the current business model that says you need to walk in the door ready to play. Very, very few companies actually train their people these days. Not just in high tech, but in practically every place you work at. I understand needing a degree for many occupations, but let's face it. If the companies twenty years ago were as stringent on being pre-trained before getting a job with them as they are now, there are a lot of tech companies in the Bay Area that wouldn't have gotten off the ground.
And that doesn't include the high number of companies that insist you have a higher degree to just apply to any of their jobs, even though the degree has nothing to do with the job itself.
Then there's the gap between CEO salaries and the average worker salary. Say whatever you like about what CEOs make, in the long run, a company doesn't run on just a CEO. When just the CEO can afford to live in a high cost area and all the average employees have had to move away, what happens to that company?
My house jumped in value 11% in the past year
Yay for me, although that means my property tax bill will increase. It's that much harder for people who don't have housing to get it.
So yeah, that 3% raise didn't defray crap. It's not even good enough to catch up what we've lost.
Rent is probably the biggest expense in a family budget, so if they went up over 2% and a raise was 3% it's reasonable to conclude some defraying happened.
Regarding ACA plans, over 80% of people on ACA get subsidies so it doesn't matter if the premiums went up. The premium could be a million bucks and they are still paying a certain percentage of their income.
The employer premiums you quoted as for what employers pay, it would be more relevant to know what they pass on to their employers.
Rent is probably the biggest expense in a family budget, so if they went up over 2% and a raise was 3% it's reasonable to conclude some defraying happened.
Regarding ACA plans, over 80% of people on ACA get subsidies so it doesn't matter if the premiums went up. The premium could be a million bucks and they are still paying a certain percentage of their income.
The employer premiums you quoted as for what employers pay, it would be more relevant to know what they pass on to their employers.
Probably a bit, since about 70-75% of Americans report they are doing better than they were 5 or 10 years ago. I would also say yes to that question. But better compared to 10 years ago isn't saying a lot and we'll never get back those years of lost income.
Still, this is not the 60s nor the 90s economy.
In order to get a good job you have to take out a mortgage for a college education.
Health care is increasingly usurious every year, to the extent my greatest nightmare is coming down with cancer or something. Not the disease, but paying for it. Think I would rather die than make my family poor.
Housing where the good jobs are goes up about like mine does per year. My town is one of those that is growing. There is cheap housing in places where there are no jobs, and jobs in places where housing is absurdly expensive or you have to commute a long way.
Ie: I've been wanting to move back to Texas. Jobs for me would be in the cities and are indeed available... and even though I'd make a bit more there, not enough to live anywhere even close. From looking at housing prices I would have a minimum 45 minute one-way commute. My commute is currently 8 minutes and a not-insignicant cost I have to consider.
Last edited by redguard57; 11-04-2018 at 01:18 PM..
Too bad hydro rates jumped (where I live) 25%
Too bad insurance rates (where I live) jumped another 25%
Too bad food prices increased immensely.
Too bad property taxes increased by almost 100%
Wages rising 3.1 % doesn't even come near to what's needed to maintain a secure home.
Yeah but plasma screen TVs are cheaper and they will lend anybody with a pulse to get a house or car so money is cheap.
If you're not smart enough to relocate then you deserve it.
That's entirely your fault.
Would you like a tissue?
Pretty jerk response...
It's NOT my fault wages have jumped so little compared to everything else.
As for relocating, you can bet we're looking into that...maybe a different country.
Some of us have built a life for ourselves...we have roots...it's not so easy to just up and move.
Keep your tissues for yourself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
