D'oh! SA Makes List of Lowest % of Residents with College Degrees (San Antonio: sales, real estate)

[Dopo]

This is the way things would look like without engineers.
That's why engineers get paid big bucks (most engineers)

[SweethomeSanAntonio]

Higher College Attainment equals higher income oppurtunties. Then Why is San Antonio's Metro Personal Income more than 13 billion dollars more than Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos? San Antonio's total employment workforce is a lil over 1,000,000 and Austin's is at 850,000. I guess the college degreed making video games isn't all that lucrative across the board. San Antonio's income grew by $2 billion and Austin loss more than $1 billion in income.

One can't go wrong futhering their education, and San Antonio is improving in this category. Dallas and Houston are better by 2%. But whatever it is San Antonio is doing something right, must be San Antonio's diversified economy.

[L210]

Across the country, the unemployment rates are higher amongst those without a degree. I would like to see the source of this data because Austin's unemployment rate is about the same as San Antonio's and Austin's median income is much higher than San Antonio's. So the only way San Antonio can beat out Austin by $13 billion is if we have most of our income concentrated amongst the wealthy, in other words, our income disparity would have to be worse. In 2008, most of our growth was in the leisure and hospitality and construction industries. Of course, you don't need a degree in those areas, but I don't think they pay that well. Right here from city-data: San Antonio median income - $42,261; Austin - $51, 372. If you remember math class, the median is what's in the middle. So San Antonio's lower half is much lower than Austin's half. For San Antonio to earn $13 billion more, our top half would have to be much higher than Austin's top half. That would all mean that our rich people are richer than Austin's rich people, but our poor people are poorer. And if I had to take a wild guess, I would guess that our rich people are much more educated than our poor in general.

According to this report done by the Brookings Institute, San Antonio is one of the most, but not the most recession proof city.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Fil...ro_monitor.pdf

Edit: There is a 150,000,000 person difference between our workforces. If you multiply that difference by San Antonio's median income, that already accounts for $6 billion. If San Antonio's rich is in fact richer or if we have more rich people, then that would easily cover the difference. I still don't understand why there is a 300 or 400k difference in our metro population, but only a 150k difference in our workforces.

[Neshomamench]

Originally Posted by SweethomeSanAntonio

Higher College Attainment equals higher income oppurtunties. Then Why is San Antonio's Metro Personal Income more than 13 billion dollars more than Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos? San Antonio's total employment workforce is a lil over 1,000,000 and Austin's is at 850,000. I guess the college degreed making video games isn't all that lucrative across the board. San Antonio's income grew by $2 billion and Austin loss more than $1 billion in income.

One can't go wrong futhering their education, and San Antonio is improving in this category. Dallas and Houston are better by 2%. But whatever it is San Antonio is doing something right, must be San Antonio's diversified economy.

Source? There is something wrong with that math.

[Neshomamench]

Originally Posted by meisha210

Across the country, the unemployment rates are higher amongst those without a degree. I would like to see the source of this data because Austin's unemployment rate is about the same as San Antonio's and Austin's median income is much higher than San Antonio's. So the only way San Antonio can beat out Austin by $13 billion is if we have most of our income concentrated amongst the wealthy, in other words, our income disparity would have to be worse. In 2008, most of our growth was in the leisure and hospitality and construction industries. Of course, you don't need a degree in those areas, but I don't think they pay that well. Right here from city-data: San Antonio median income - $42,261; Austin - $51, 372. If you remember math class, the median is what's in the middle. So San Antonio's lower half is much lower than Austin's half. For San Antonio to earn $13 billion more, our top half would have to be much higher than Austin's top half. That would all mean that our rich people are richer than Austin's rich people, but our poor people are poorer. And if I had to take a wild guess, I would guess that our rich people are much more educated than our poor in general.

According to this report done by the Brookings Institute, San Antonio is one of the most, but not the most recession proof city.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Fil...ro_monitor.pdf

Edit: There is a 150,000,000 person difference between our workforces. If you multiply that difference by San Antonio's median income, that already accounts for $6 billion. If San Antonio's rich is in fact richer or if we have more rich people, then that would easily cover the difference. I still don't understand why there is a 300 or 400k difference in our metro population, but only a 150k difference in our workforces.

Hard to imagine our "rich" being richer. Dell has more money than all of our billionaires combined. Of course that doesnt represent the whole sample size, I understand that but it does represent the starting point.

[L210]

But if that number is true ($13 billion), there would have to be a reason for it because our median income in San Antonio is $9,000 less than Austin's and our unemployment rates are about the same. It's pretty obvious to see that our poor are poorer than Austin's which would mean most of the wealth would be concentrated at the top.

[Neshomamench]

Dont get me wrong, I am not calling out "San Antonio." We have a diversified economy but lets not forget two very important factors, we lack the private educated sector (although we are moving in the right direction with BioMed) and San Antonio is a Military town and those dollars being pumped in here right now skew the numbers.

Having said all of that, I still think those numbers are fishy and want to see the source.

[SweethomeSanAntonio]

Released August 2010. San Antonio is not the same city it was 25 years ago. It is growing and is the only city that gained income out of all the cities in the nation. It's San Antonio's diversified economy that makes it a 21st Century powerhouse.
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regi...df/mpi0810.pdf

[firstclassflyer]

Originally Posted by SweethomeSanAntonio

Released August 2010. San Antonio is not the same city it was 25 years ago. It is growing and is the only city that gained income out of all the cities in the nation. It's San Antonio's diversified economy that makes it a 21st Century powerhouse.
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regi...df/mpi0810.pdf

21st century powerhouse...bwahahahahahahaha. what a "homer".

[SweethomeSanAntonio]

That is what our mayor described San Antonio as!