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.
Those are required to be able to do the job, but obviously there are other requirements. This particular person would be able to do the other things he currently can't do which hold him back if he were more educated in the basics.
Right now he can't convert 87" to 7' 3".
What requirements? Seriously, $20 an hour would be more then Im making right now, and a year at that would be the second highest year I ever had, and Im almost 31 years old.
I have a degree, and as a requirement for a job I made about $22 an hour at (if you bent the salary to a 40 hour work week), required mastery of what would probably be considered pre-calc in college.
Hell, I made $10 an hour in a job that required a college level mastery of statistics.
Did you even read my post? I said I was born in the late 70's, not "I was working in the late 70's". So my point is that even in the short time frame from when I was just of college around 2000 to now, standards for entry-level have gotten much higher and will likely continue to do so in the future.
I disagree with those, though. I look at the students graduating from my university since I am still closely affiliated with the school. We have the same number of students landing jobs today as we did a decade ago. And the number is close to 100%. This might not be true for a lower quality university... but why shoot yourself in the food by going there?
Getting a GED is a good start. Getting training of some sort--even if it means remedial computer training from the local unemployment office (free) for those who don't even know how to turn on the power is another. I have a guy in my shop, great guy, good at what he does (limited), but he's never going any further than the (barely) semi-skilled $13 an hour he makes because he has zero computer skills, reads and writes on maybe a 4th grade level, and has minimal math skills. We can't have him making cuts because he can't read a ruler, we can't have him mixing anything because he can't do the basic math to get the mixtures correct. If he would take free remedial adult-ed/GED prep classes at the local community college or vo-tech and get some actual skills, he'd be able to quickly grow into a $20/hour position.
It is 2012 gas is 4 dollars a gallon rent food everything is higher. But wages are falling in most cases for most jobs. I made 10 bucks an hour as a temp in 2011. My grandpa's plant paid 11.50 an hour in 1986 full medical. This was just a starting out wage floor help trades guys made alot more. Andy posted how he made 14 bucks an hour in a machine shop entry level job 10 years later he said those jobs pay 12 bucks an hour. And I bet their are shops starting people at 10 bucks an hour because they can get away with it. Like my Mom says you get what you pay for they want tons of skills ten bucks an hour I see it all the time. If you want good workers you will have to pay for them. Everything is part time temp freelance 1099 anything to keep from paying a living wage. We are on a race to the bottom. So you have to be a rocket scientists or have niche IT skills to make a living wage? Business wants big profits but pay their workers nothing you can not have it both ways. Something has to give at some point.
From reading the posts, perhaps, the first thing to do, in order to come up with a solution, is identify exactly what "income inequity" is.
In 1960, the average income for semi-professional and non-professional jobs was $7060 a year. In 2010, the average income for those same jobs was $45,406. (source of information is athttp://msn.careerbuilder.com/Article...=JS_2146_home1) And, from another source,. the 2010 figure is about 25% too high. Unfortunately, I do not have the link to the other source.
According to another source, http://msn.careerbuilder.com/Article...=JS_2146_home1 executive income has gone up six times in just the last twenty years. Another words, an exec that is making $360,000 today, was only making $60,000 twenty years ago.
It says that executive pay went up an average of 30% each year for the last twenty years while middle-class America has only gotten an average of 12% each year for the last fifty years. And, we're not including bonuses or "Golden Parachutes".
One more area to look at, and this is from my own experience. In 1965 and 1966, I was making $8,000 a year. I was also paying 17 cents a gallon for gasoline. Just today, the current price of gasoline at the corner gas station at the corner is $3.599. To maintain the ratio between income and the cost of gasoline, today's average income should be about $170,000 a year.
In 1973, I was making $14,000 a year, and paying $51 every six months for car insurance. (And, supporting a wife and two kids, while buying a house for $10,000) The last premium I paid on car insurance came out to $147 a month. Back in 1973, the monthly cost was just $8.50. To maintain the ratio of income to car insurance premiums, today's average income should be about$240,000 a year. Want to check with IRS and see just how many "Average Americans" are actually making that much? And, the story is the same no matter what area of expense you look at, groceries, utilities, housing, etc.
That is what is "INCOME INEQUITY". What to do about it is the "$64,000 question". Solutions are sure to be as varied as the people that offer them, but now, you should be able to come up with a better informed opinion.
Now, with regard to the quote, by all means, give your kids every advantage you can. Stress education. Any kind of court record will hurt their chances for a successful career. But, keep in mind...
Let's say that 99% of the next generation gets a master's degree. (No, I don't think that's realistic) It's also not realistic to think that every one of them will get jobs where they will use that degree. There will be a number of them serving at Pizza Hut. A good education and a clean record does not give them a guarantee, but it does improve their chances at a comfortable life." (end quote)
Congratulations the_windwalker, you've earned a spot on my anecdotes collection that's meant to show in a very concrete way the wage stagflation or really deflation experienced for the bottom 80-90 percent of workers the last 30-40 years. I submit only the top 1- 20% percent of wage earners has kept up with cost inflation. That's 2 in 10 workers, certainly NOT middle class, and I think 20% is pushing it. More like the top 10%.
Keep in mind when you read these anecdotes and watch Dr. Warren's lecture think RATIOS. That's exactly my point. For example: "In 1973, I was making $14,000 a year, and paying $51 every six months for car insurance. (And, supporting a wife and two kids, while buying a house for $10,000). How many people now make 40% more IN ONE YEAR than the value of their HOME!!!!: cool::thi nk: GuyNTexas' anecdote illustrates this point very well also.
Originally Posted by workingclasshero Original post: http://www.city-data.com/forum/15893673-post369.html so what does that make ...heck the MINIIMUM salery for the WORST player in the NFL is 310k...are you SERIOUSLY going to call a benchwarmer rich????
I'm sure a guy making 400k will say he is poor complared to bill gates and his BILLIONS...or the millioniares like John Kerry
just because SALARIES havent kept up with INFLATION doesnt mean we should still CLASSIFY based on 1955/1965 numbers.......average salary in 1966..6900...median house price 14k....about 50% right...use those numbers compared to the meadin house....the median salary SHOULD be 130k...not 50k
sorry but this is not 1955 , when 250k was rich...please get with the times...its 2010
Here is the_windwalkers explanation to a reply: Original Post: http://www.city-data.com/forum/21850961-post142.html "The "inequity" comes in where the expenses have out-paced the income for the average American. While EVERYTHING ELSE has gone up, income for the "middle-class" has stagnated over the last fifty years. That is the problem with the economy today. The "middle-class", the MAJORITY of Americans do not have enough money to keep the economy flowing. Inequity = DIS-PROPORTIONATE".
Show me just one exec whose decisions are actually worth a million dollars a day. Even just a thousand dollars a day. Think about it. As great as he was, even Steve Jobs is now replaced. And, as great as he was for the company, he was not that great for America. Look where your Apple product is made. American jobs?
Ever hear of "The Law of Diminishing Returns"? Keep raising your prices, and eventually, you'll price yourself out of business. That is what Corporate America has done. They have priced the economy out of business.
Take a look at the cost of a kit to put a motor on a bicycle. A 50 CC kit has gone up nearly $100 because of the demand. They're replacing cars with motorized bicycles and scooters. And, the auto industry isn't doing as well as they were ten years ago.
If a cashier is being paid exactly what they are worth, then we're paying far more for everything than it's worth. Gasoline isn't worth $3.599 a gallon. Why are we paying that much? Car insurance is not worth what we're paying. Why are we paying it?"
Withou further ado here's the rest of the collection. In my opinion no one who is honest, can think critically and do math can deny what's contained herein:
Pay close attention to the years in the following posts of people who lived in the mid 70's-early 80's:
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasherOriginal Post: http://www.city-data.com/forum/21049746-post9.html Sad. I made $9 an hour during the Summer break in the mid 1980s running telephone lines in office buildings. It was a horrible low paying job then. You know what $9 is worth today adjusted for inflation since 1985. $4.42 cents. That same job today would be need to pay $18.50 per hour. If you have no perspective on how things suck..you'll settle for anything. The USA will look like these ghettos in Brazil before people wake up to this right wing propaganda they've been spoon fed for 30 years.
THIS!!!!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^+100000000
Right on padcrasher!!!!!!!!!
"You know what $9 is worth today adjusted for inflation since 1985. $4.42 cents." Maybe not even that much.
Once again this post is appropriate.
Originally Posted by wawaweewa Original Post:http://www.city-data.com/forum/19747215-post241.html Just because things were better, doesn't mean they were great. I don't deny that there were folks like yourself. Nevertheless, more opportunity (on average) did exist back then.
During college I worked part time at a warehouse. One of my co workers was a Guyanese who came into the US illegally in '77 or '78 (he later received amnesty under Reagan). He used to tell me how his first job, as an illegal, paid $10.50/hour. In 2006, after he was laid off from a warehouse making 33/hour, we were working for $12/hr. $10.50 in '78 or 12 in 2006. Inflation much?
In 1980, I had an entry level job as a sound engineer with a local independent TV station earning $5.00 per hour.One paycheck paid my rent and utilities and auto insurance and the other 3 paycheckseach month were disposable income.
An entry level job today pays $8.50 to $10 per hour and even at $10 per hour it takes 2 paychecks to cover the cost of rent, utilities and auto insurance (and don't forget in 1980 $10 -- or two hours of work -- paid for 2 tickets to the cinema show, a tank full of gasoline and something to eat after the movie -- the cost of two movie tickets now is over $20).
GuyNTexas says IT ALL Here!!!!
Originally Posted byGuyNTexas: Original Post: http://www.city-data.com/forum/15876838-post225.html
No. I'm really disagreeing with .. not missing your point. And those numbers don't tell a very accurate story, and the proof is demonstrated by the drop in net worth of middle income earners as their debt has increased significantly, while earnings have declined relative to inflation.
By most measurable data points, the middle income class has been dying a very slow, incremental death for 4 decades because the costs on high ticket items have increased more rapidly than the either the inflation rate or rates of increases in income. To further compound the problem, average income levels have failed to keep pace with the inflation rate itself. Much of this goes unnoticed because of it's slow incremental nature (like growing old). But if you are old enough, and still maintain your mental faculties, you can't be bull $hted into believing what you are trying to say here.
As just one example, in 1977, I bought a brand new Pontiac Trans Am for $5200. And since it was my first car purchase, I suspect I was clubbed like a baby seal (paid full MSRP), as I simply asked how much, and said OK (later I learned the error of this way to purchase automobiles )
Now today, that car is no longer available, but a comparable car "Chevy Camero SS" is. And a similarly configured model is around $35,000 MSRP. Which is almost double the adjusted for inflation number of $18,700 that Camero should cost relative to the $5200 Trans Am of 1977.
My income back then was 14,000 or just shy of 3 times what the car cost ... if you apply that same formula to the $35,000 Camero today, I'd have to earn roughly $100,000 per year to maintain the same standard (drive the same car) as my $14,000 income provided then. I was not wealthy then .. I was a 20 year oldworking in a warehouse driving a forklift. And I don't think there are many 6 figure forklift drivers around today ...I would say, the 40-50K range would be the upper limit ... or roughly the same as my $14,000 would be, adjusted for inflation.
This is one example, and almost any big item ... car, house, etc. works out to be the same. Some other items like Healthcare have dramatically exceeded those rates exponentially compared to 1977 where mine was absolutely free and first rate, including dental.
Now, add to this the higher taxes, social security withholding, and medicare ... all of which have exceeded the inflation rate (and don't let anyone BS you into believing it hasn't), means that the net spending power of your income has declined dramatically over the past 30+ years. (See video below she documents ALL this IN DETAIL)
Now around about that same time frame, my step father worked for one of the US Government agencies earning roughly in the 50-60K range, and at the time, that was very good money, but not even close to RICH & Wealthy .... but adjusted for inflation, that comes out to around $200+K now. The house he purchased then at $50,000 appraised for $480,000 in 2004-5 even though the adjusted for inflation value would have only dictated a $155,000 figure ... 3 times the inflation rate!! By the time he retired in the late 90's, his income may have doubled, yet his house increased by 6-8 fold. What does that tell you?
Now if you are following me here ... this is where it gets real hairy ... if you take a Quarter ... 25 cents ... from say 1964 (the last 90% silver Quarter) that 25 cents equates to $1.76 in 2010 value. But guess what? Today's melt value of that sliver quarter is about $3.70 which is again more than double the published inflation rate ....
So what does that all mean? It means very simply, that the value of your money is worth about half of what it's claimed to be worth, even after being adjusted for inflation .... and all it takes is to actually look at the historical costs of items like cars, and houses and health care costs from the late 60's to today, and also the median incomes. You see that the purchasing power has indeed declined. And this is a result of the devaluation of the currency (a hidden tax).
So when it comes to buying power, there has been a continuous decline that doubles the the inflation rates admitted .. which is why the middle class really doesn't exist for all practical purposes today.
There are the ultra wealthy, and the rest. The $250kers are just at the higher end of that rest of us, and they are the last of the upper middle class, and the next in line to fall ... apparently, much to delight of many who think that they are members of the Wealthy Club, and must fall for the sake of everyone.
I suppose this proves that indeed, misery loves company.
I disagree with those, though. I look at the students graduating from my university since I am still closely affiliated with the school. We have the same number of students landing jobs today as we did a decade ago. And the number is close to 100%. This might not be true for a lower quality university... but why shoot yourself in the food by going there?
I don't think the issue is folks with 4 year degrees not obtaining employment. The issue is the employment they are finding these days significantly underpays what it has in the past.
Example: Attorneys. Attorney pay has dropped considerably in the last few years.
I disagree with those, though. I look at the students graduating from my university since I am still closely affiliated with the school. We have the same number of students landing jobs today as we did a decade ago. And the number is close to 100%. This might not be true for a lower quality university... but why shoot yourself in the food by going there?
Argh, everyone cant go to your school, thats part of the point.
Someone made a great analogy on this board Id love to give credit to, but dont remember who said it.
Its like musical chairs.
You can either look at it two ways, either, the number of people stay the same, and the chairs just keep dissapearing (this would symbolize automation)
Or, you can look at it as more people getting added, and no more chairs being added (symbolizing the increasing number of college degreed people competing for a pool of jobs requiring those skills that is stagnant).
No matter what college you go to, how much training you get, or whatever ridiculous attribute you put on those having employment, EVERYONE cant have a chair. Chairs are not created as more people enter the game.
What requirements? Seriously, $20 an hour would be more then Im making right now, and a year at that would be the second highest year I ever had, and Im almost 31 years old.
I have a degree, and as a requirement for a job I made about $22 an hour at (if you bent the salary to a 40 hour work week), required mastery of what would probably be considered pre-calc in college.
Hell, I made $10 an hour in a job that required a college level mastery of statistics.
You would need five years as a painter in an industrial capacity--this is nothing like painting a house or a car. You would have to be willing to work in extreme heat and cold, stand, stoop, and kneel all day, be skilled in the use of air and/or hydraulically driven power tools, and a variety of other skills.
You would need five years as a painter in an industrial capacity--this is nothing like painting a house or a car. You would have to be willing to work in extreme heat and cold, stand, stoop, and kneel all day, be skilled in the use of air and/or hydraulically driven power tools, and a variety of other skills.
Ahh, so, you are actually requiring a highly skilled person with 5 years experience to make $13 an hour (although he could make $20 if he could actually function)
So, what you are saying is that, a person who just graduated out of some couple month vocational program wouldnt even qualify for your jobs, or is that the guy you pay $8 an hour?
Ahh, so, you are actually requiring a highly skilled person with 5 years experience to make $13 an hour (although he could make $20 if he could actually function)
He's not highly skilled because he can only do a fraction of the job. If he could do the entire job he would be considered skilled, but not highly skilled. He really should only make $10 an hour given what he's capable of doing, but he's reliable and has been with us for seven years, so his pay rate has reflected that.
Quote:
So, what you are saying is that, a person who just graduated out of some couple month vocational program wouldnt even qualify for your jobs, or is that the guy you pay $8 an hour?
Not what I said at all.
Apprentices make $8. Depending on what specific job they perform, someone fresh out of trade/vo-tech school could expect to make $13-15, that number rises quickly as they earn certifications.
He's not highly skilled because he can only do a fraction of the job. If he could do the entire job he would be considered skilled, but not highly skilled.
So, in your opinion, a person with 5 years experience operating industrial painting equipment, is not skilled?
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.
: cool:
$10.50 in '78 or 12 in 2006. Inflation much?
) 
If he could do the entire job he would be considered skilled, but not highly skilled. He really should only make $10 an hour given what he's capable of doing, but he's reliable and has been with us for seven years, so his pay rate has reflected that.
