This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Median Male Worker Makes Less Now Than 43 Years Ago
While the fact that a record number of Americans are living in poverty should not surprise anyone at this point, what should surprise many is that according to Table P-5 of the Census report of (Lack of) Income, the median male is now worse on a gross, inflation adjusted basis, than he was in... 1968! While back then, the median income of male workers was $32,844, it has since risen declined to $32,137 as of 2010. And there is your lesson in inflation 101 (which we assume is driven by the CPI, which likely means that the actual inflation adjusted income decline is far worse than what is even reported). The only winner: women, whose median inflation adjusted income over the same period has increased by 188%. That said, it is still at 65% of what the median male makes. So injustice all around. And now, it is time to be patriotic again and buy a Pontiac Aztek.
»
- 31391 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
you left out video games, like Call of Duty, and World of Warcraft.
dudes are busy now, yo.
Because too many of us don't have the skillset for those Wall Street jobs that normally pay nine-digit Xmas bonuses. Most of us got brainwashed to believe all the shit along the way. No wonder.
Uploaded by RussiaToday on Sep 13, 2011
This week Max Keiser and co-host, Stacy Herbert, discuss psyops in the gold market, Tony Blair's con job in Libya and Jamie Dimon's 'patriotic' bailout in America. In the second half of the show Max talks to Nick Verbitsky, director of "Confidence Game," a film that explores the last week in the life of investment bank Bear Stearns.
KR on FB: www.facebook.com/KeiserReport
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXuTSLoi374
You People! Need to be more supportive of the Job Creators!!
Our Poor Job Creators are struggling on a mere 10 X's more money than "We the People" Spend on our Military!
Our Poor Wall Street Personalities who are Charged with doing God's Work (*Buy Washington DC).. are stuck! with only Ten Times More Money than the United States Military gets to spend fighting ALL! the Wars / Fronts in Different Countries that America is involved with.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.
Libya.
Somalia.
??? How many other Countries are we in Privately?
I guess that Wall Street having to hire all those Private Soldiers (that way the Deaths are OFF THE RECORD!) for $10k a month for a Foot Soldier.. might add up to some of the monies..
Wall Street gets 10 times more Tax Dollars than America's Military!
American Tax Payers then have to Barrow Money from Wall Street to Give to Wall Street!
So, "We the People" are charged interest by the same people that "We the People" are GIFTING TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS!
Have You Idiots Figured Out that it is NOT! the Poor People who have no Lobby? It is Not the POOR! People!! who had their Manufacturing Jobs Sent Off Shore (to China) for Lobby Dollars.. Then "We the People" were Taxed to Pay for the Tax Breaks / Subsidies / Tax Credits!
America's Manufacturing Base was Gutted so that the Government would have 3 workers for every ONE (1) Manufacturing Job in America!
These Wall Street Corporations / JOB CREATORS!! with their quarterly Bonus Mentality have GUTTED!! America!
Poor people in the do NOT!! have a Multi-Billion Dollar Lobby!
GrandMa! Does! NOT!! have a Multi-Billion Dollar Lobby!! the AARP can NOT!! compete with Wall Street! Obama is Big Business, The Republicans are Big Business and whomever is Elected will continue the path laid out by Daddy Bush! just like Clinton, Lil Bush and Obama have!!
WAKE UP!!
Wall Street Get 10 Times More money that the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines get combined!! Every Year! This Year during War Time!
Don't you feel better making sure Wall Street gets Their Bonus Checks!
EVERY QUARTER!?!?!
http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/13/7742437-poverty-rate-hits-18-year-high-as-median-income-falls?GT1=43001
The number of Americans who have fallen into poverty rose to 15.1 percent in 2010, the highest level in nearly two decades, the Census Bureau said Tuesday in a report.
The report, which showed the poverty rate rose for a third straight year as the economy struggles with a stumbling recovery and persistent high joblessness, said the number of poor Americans in 2010 was the largest in the 52 years that it has been publishing poverty estimates, according to Reuters.
There were 46.2 million people in poverty in 2010, up from 43.6 million in 2009 ? the fourth consecutive annual increase in the figure.
In a report that covers the first full calendar year after the end of the Great Recession, the bureau also said real median income dropped for the third year in a row.
Median household income in the United States in 2010 was $49,445, a 2.3 percent decline from the 2009 median, after adjusting for inflation.
The percentage of Americans without health insurance coverage was not statistically different from the previous year, the bureau said.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: TUESDAY, SEPT. 13, 2011 Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2010http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/income_wealth/cb11-157.html
Thresholds
(See <http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html> for the complete set of dollar value thresholds that vary by family size and composition.)
One person (unrelated individual)....... 11,139
Under 65 years.............................. 11,344Sort of just conversing with yourself in the middle of the party JW.
Poverty Thresholds for 2010 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children Under 18 Years
One person (unrelated individual)....... $11,139
Under 65 years.............................. $11,344
65 years and over........................... $10,458I doubt that most of us here could live on those numbers, Monthly.
From the XLS sheet (link above).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CATBnSNU6aE
Uploaded by PressTVGlobalNews on Sep 13, 2011
http://www.presstv.com/Program/198899.html
The current British cabinet is sometimes dubbed millionaires row because there are 16 millionaires that sit on it.
Bankers in Britain are taking home bonuses as big as ever, in the first year of a Conservative government there are 20 new billionaires in Britain, up 37%. Meanwhile in the real world, 1 in 5 young people are unemployed and the gap between rich and poor keeps on growing.
My first car was a yellow pontiac aztek that my dad bought me... What a spaciour but horrible car. Giant trunk, bad in every other way. I couldn't complain about a brand new car given to me but damn what a bad decision by my father. Who would prossibly actually want one. That is around the time i became a permabear on GM.
The thing looks like a nightmare on wheels.
A good tip for buying a new car is this. If it's the fucking ugliest machine you've ever seen, consider another vehicle.
Pontiac Azteks are actually very good vehicles. They were just waaay ahead of their time as the first crossover. This statement is substantiated by the fact that the Aztek has the highest customer satisfaction rating of ANY Pontiac ever made. That's higher that the Firebird, Trans Am, GTO, Bonneville, Grand Prix etc. Not too shabby. They looked too different from their peers in 2001 when it was introduced, but look pretty conventional comapred to modern vehicles. I own a 2003 model with 115,000 miles on it and it still runs and looks like new. I would love to find a good deal on a low mileage 2005 model (last year it was made) when this one gets tired in 50,000 miles or so. Ok.......let the flaming begin!
More power to you and all the other satisfied Aztek owners. I say rock on with your bad self. Still, that doesn't change the fact that it was the ugliest car ever made. :)
Yes, well if more people bought cars because of their utility value instead of how pretty they are, they would all have better cars instead of pretty piles of crap. Besides, I think the Aztek is beautiful. :P
Same goes for wives.
I remember when the TV show "Survivor" awarded a contestant with a brand new Asstek for accomplishing some objective or winning something. The poor SOB who won it had this look on their face like, "ohhh, you shouldn't have...can't I just have cash instead?" Laughed my ass off!!!
I remember a local golf tournament where the prize for hitting a hole in one on a particular hole was a brand new aztek... literally, EVERYONE tried to miss it... hilarious.
While he may make less, he borrows more - so it all works out.
'And now, it is time to be patriotic again and buy a Pontiac Aztek.'
On credit. Fixed.
'Pontiac Aztec' HA HAAAA HA!
in 1978, a local tractor manufacturer was hiring 18 year old high school grads off the street and with overtime you could make $30k/yr, at the same time a new midrange car or truck was give or take $5000
so where are the jobs that 2 months gross buys a new vehicle for the working stiff?
granted its an analogy but it seems to be the easiest way to explain the uneplainable to people that wonder where the america we once knew went due to nafta et al
Re: 2010 dollars. Was official CPI-W used to calculate median income? If so, than in reality things much more grim...
they adjusted the current median of $48245 down to 1978 levels
Then wouldn't the chart be labeled "1978 Dollars"?
Winning!
bullish sex change technology???
The only winner: women, whose median inflation adjusted income over the same period has increased by 188%. That said, it is still at 65% of what the median male makes. So injustice all around.
Good heavens, Social Justice Tyler is driving today.
I suppose when childern are forced to work to make ends meet (and they make the same as adult males) true justice and equality will finally have been achieved. Might it be the case that deteriorating adult male income is in part a result of downward wage pressure from the added competition of women in the workforce? Can't have it both ways.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that most American women with kids who work do so because they have to not because they want to. That's not "winning" that's a depressing take-away about the rising cost of living.
Not exactly sure how you disagreed with the italicized...
I know I am asking to get shit on here but if we're talking about equality and/or injustice, wouldn't "injustice" be better illustarated by showing pay levels for the same work, not just a median income for all work, even if they are working in lower skilled, or part time jobs. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison, IMHO. For example, I bet a woman teacher will make the same money per hour as her male counterpart.
That women only make 65% of what men make (I doubt it’s anywhere near that for equivalent jobs) doesn't necessarily point to "injustice". Women have been over 50% of U.S. medical school graduates for many years now but the fact is they seek out less demanding specialties, do less research, work less hours and retire earlier. I doubt medicine is unique in this regard. For whatever reasons women still, as a group, bring a different set of motivations to the workplace.
There's nothing wrong with this of course but it illustrates how there are more significant factors at play than top-down discrimination. Especially post-2008 I think we should be wary of equating statistical "disparate impact" with wrongdoing (as the O Administration is still very intent on doing.
The injustice in question was relating to the imminent kneejerk crowd response. Frankly, there is nothing wrong with inflation adjusted incomes declining in 43 years either: it is the trade off of the "welfare" state and of "price stability" courtesy of the Fed. Right?
Everyone equally destitute, the dream of all central planner Marxists such as we have presently running the show.
My bad then.
For the most part I think real purchasing power for non-crap items has declined even more than inflation adjustments imply....so we've been engineering and encouraging the mechanisms for piling on debt to make up the difference all these years.
Some Americans at least (and hopefully more) are reconsidering the wisdom of their liberty/security trades with their government.
Do take into consideration that "medicine" and "doctors" have traditionally been almost exclusively a male profession - like "wall street" - and therefore it can be a very stressful career path for some females to take - witness the areas that female doctors tend to specialise in, there IS a grouping, and their IS a market for them - usually from other females. There's a reason for this.
Similar to these commentary threads, males do group together and support exclusive viewpoints towards any "others" - be it racial, gender, etc.
Now now Tyler, don't be hating the Aztek. If it's good enough for the Breaking Bad crew, it's good enough for me.
http://www.amctv.com/shows/breaking-bad
fail
Could I get that in German please? To go? :>)
I agree with your avatar.
I think they put one on Breaking Bad as a kind of joke. DAMN that thing is horrid! Even the color of 'keg party splatters'...Looks like some deranged lunatic designed it.
Is Tyler being ironic? According to wiki, the Aztek was produced at General Motors' Ramos Arizpe, Mexico, assembly plant.
Is that colour on that car or primer ??
My, my, what a pretty car! White would be better though.
I like the spare tire being utilized...
An American classic.
Considering its GM pedigree, it is astonishng that the temporary spare has even remained inflated. In terms of sheer paucity of looks, Pontiac's little fella' remains the runner-up to this Made in the U.S.A gem:
http://static.rcgroups.net/forums/attachments/1/8/6/5/6/5/a3657440-61-19...
I have fond, and very bad, memories of the AMC Gremlin. The reason it was my second used car was because I could afford it. The reason I could afford it was because it was a piece of s**t and no one wanted it, driving down it's used price into my $300 category way back then.
Some people have no shame and will slap a outsized motor and fat tires on anything.
Yours didn't happen to be [ Gulden's ] mustard yellow with a black "racing" stripe ?
CD, people will pimp just about anything. What is wrong with this picture ?
http://image.hotrod.com/f/29048552+w750+st0/hrdp_1010_01_o+steve_bashfor...
I love the 'woodie' look.
Whatdya mean no one wanted such a pos? I drove one for the post office in the summer of '78 - blue smoke out the tail pipe and brake squeals galore! You could really feel the road in one of those babies. I figure the gremlin fleet did MUCH for the image of the USPS. Probably Mr O's dream car for the proleteriate.
I see the top one had all the classic signs of rusting out. Even back when I was a teen I never saw one of those things that didn't have missing floor pans. One guy drove his religiously and we called him Fred Flinstone because you could put your feet on the ground through the holes. He literally only covered them up with carpet; when he reached 40 or so mph you'd have to put your feet on the sides of the carpet or it would fly up. What an utterly ugly piece of junk steel/rust...!
Pontiac Who?
Yeah a Pontiac Aztek.... 185 BHP of raw unbridled passion from a 3.4L engine.... Genius!
American males don't need as much income, because a Pontiac Aztec is a car AND a home!
Is that rated for highway speeds?
Don't come knockin'
So...a Pontiac Aztec is a car AND a home AND a place of business? An iPad can't even do that! What value!
true but you can't eat an Aztec
But an Aztec can eat you...
This is what happens when society centralizes its power structure.
Yeah, but you can't eat an Aztec. Or can you?
Jinx.
Ha!
Dozens of times, literally, I have closed my eyes and tried to imagine the design review meeting where they walk around the clay mock-up of an Aztec and look at the pictures, and say.. "Yep - we're done - that's the design we want, let's get the factory started on those..."
Just as the jackass (camel?) is a horse designed by committee, so was the Aztek a car/SUV by committee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee
One of the most disturbing looking vehicles in recent memory...but hey it has a tent! I would rather drive a decent looking vehicle and bring a tent. By the looks of said design debacle it is rather inconspicous when deployed not allowing for any covert camping that a camper van (VW or bunch of Toyota previa converted ones) lends.
What is uglier the Aztec or Jobs situation?
probably not...probably was some diversity and a bunch of people who flat out didn't give a shit. Have you seen GM's other offerings? Not much better.
GM was no longer a car company at that point; it was a finance ponzi company with a legacy car business. GM was a finance ponzi company with a legacy aircraft engine, MRI, nuke plant, and home appliance business.
The best job around today is a repo-man, one of my friends does it and is so busy theyre working 14 hour days.
Aztek assback, bitches!
Median is the new Assed Out.
makes "job" creation kind of a moot point along with the fact that a de-industrialized service sector economy does not even offer the minimal opportunities for an unprecedented marginalization of the domestic work force. the only question that remains for some of us is-by design or accident?
Yeah, you might have been making more money back then but you had slaves and junk, right?
If we could just get back to the 19th century wages would soar, just like they did under the robber barons. First we eliminate every regulation; health, safety, environmental. Then we get kids working in the coal mines again. Finally we get everyone working 80 hours a week without pesky government interference, and watch the money roll in. Because if you can't trust Big Business to share the wealth and focus on worker wellness and satisfaction, well, who can you trust?
Cannery row, here we come. It'll be nirvana.
Why did kids work in the coal mines? And the Robber Barrons were reducing prices to the average consumers, driving their competition out of business in the process who couldn't offer services at that lower price. Last counterpoint I've yet to see a donor list for a politician where I see indidual names as their top donors, unless of course they have a Big Business they're running. We already live in your cannery row and we have CNN to keep us informed.
I haven't seen a defense of monopoly and child labor before. Congratulations for getting so much retrograde thought in one paragraph. Three cheers for Standard Oil!
You mean the standard oil that reduced the price of kerosene by 90% between the time they were founded and the time they were broken up by the government?
Didn't Rockefeller reduce the price of kerosene, to put his competitors out of business and then he bought them up? Maybe I'm thinking of a different Rockefeller.
What most who crow about corporate-sponsored donations conveniently forget is that the decision to make that donation was made by a small number of people. Those people do not give of themselves, but of the profit they chose not to share with the workers who actually created it*. They go out into media circles for the photo ops and self-congradulatory pontification, not to mention the tax breaks (dur, we're doing massive layoffs in the US and we abuse kids in China, but we gave $X million to elephantitis so we _deserve_ relief), for funds that are manipulated and ultimately serve agendas incongruent with the country's best interests.
*People complain about the forced charity of government aid...well WTF do they think this is?
yeah, because that's exactly how it happened, ITG. Which (public) high school history book are you referencing?
On the other hand, health, safety, and environmental regulations have gone a long way towards protecting our waterways and public interest right? I mean, in the absence of gov't regulation of those areas, surely no private entity (cough cough URL cough cough) could fill the void?
Fact is, de facto private regulatory agencies already exist....and you know it. Ever bought anything online? Shame on you if you let the comments influence your decision.
Finally, the solution is clear, defined property rights...and the defense thereof. In a truly free society private property owners could settle disputes based on defense of property and self-interest.
What was the average wage before the time of the robber barons, and after?
Yeah, I thought so.
And what did the kids do before they worked in the coal mines? Backbreaking labor on the farm, where most of them died before they reached the age of 12.
Dumbshit liberals never understand that people pick the best life they have available. They look at the terrible conditions during the industrial revolution and utterly fail to understand that the alternative was far, FAR worse, and that those poor "slaves" became the middle class within a few decades.
Hilarious that you think the government just mandated that wages should go up, and that working hours should go down, and it was so, as if the king commands the tides. Nevermind the decades of capital accumulation that had to happen, or the fact that wages rose WITHOUT ANY INTERVENTION WHATSOEVER (or did you forget that Henry Ford paid three times the going wage in his factories?).
Hey, I've got an idea. Let's just mandate that the work week be reduced to five hours a week. What could possibly go wrong?
It's nice to see someone willing to stand up for serfdom. If you want the 'freedom' of working without those soul-crushing safety and minimum wage laws there are plenty of sweatshops in southeast Asia where you can assemble shoes for 20 hours a day for a pittance. Or maybe you prefer Ipad assembly in China; they provide a barracks for you to live. Taste the freedom.
Or you can just wait; as the article relates you, and people like you, are slowly being squeezed out of the middle class. Enjoy that lifestyle adjustment, downward.
The numbers do not include benefits, which are mostly government regulated, like health care, and rising sharply. In fact frozen gross wages are explained statistically wholly by rising costs of government controlled entities.
Give me a market, even regulated like the food industry, in health care and SS, and you'll see costs decline and standards of living rise.
Let me guess, you want to eliminate SS and let people put their money in the stock market. It'll be safe there, HFTs will protect it.
Social security has already been eliminated. They just won't tell anyone until they are absolutely out of money. I guess you like surprises like that.
Hmmmm, and Gold was still a standard back in 1968. Also of note is debt levels in 1968 were much lower a percentage of disposable income and people saved more.
Chicks were a lot cooler too with decent curvy bodies and a care free attitude.
but they didn't shave their bushes...I'm just back from 1968 in my time machine with a stack of 1oz. Maple Leafs. what a windfall.
the "curvy bodies" and "unshaved bushes" - you may not realise it, but those were features of an adult female body. . . now you get the androgyny of a 12yr. old girl, because that's what "culture" demands of women, the appearance of a child, "gagging for it". . .
Love and peace, brother. Gas was about 38 cents a gallon, a good used car could be bought for under $1000, and McDonald's hamburgers were just 15 cents.
Sorry to say this as a current hippie/radical/college dropout, but my generation of Baby Boomers blew it. Tried for change in the 60s, didn't work out, and they all turned into mimics of Joe Lavorgna.
Sad, we had Nixon and the Republicans by the balls, so bad they shot four dead in O-H-I-O.
Everything has gone straight downhill since the 60s, pretty much, so I guess a return to those days of music, parties, and sex should be making an appearance, as soon as everybody jettisons their health insurance and stops paying into SS.
Groovy, man. Pass the bong.
when you radicals turned professional and swept into DC as "Watergate babies" the slope got slippery fast...
The answer is simple, just change the CPI calculations again. If only counting working males then don't even need to worry about unemployment. and chaining that CPI down fixes SS to. Yep lying about inflation even more fixes all the problems. Should probably engineer the formula with such a monstrous deflationary bias as to give cover to Zimbabwe Ben.
I’m waiting for the sweet looking Aztek to hit the “deer in the head light” picture then run off the road into the “Obama face” billboard.
We still have not made a low and incomes will fall and fall because the prevailing worldwide labor rate is $5/day w/o any benefits or legal protections. There is a world wide labor surplus because of the www.... internet which allowed/encouraged globalization. Only the elites, geeks, politically connected (some union) will escape the wage death spiral. Eventually nearly all entitlements will be scraped and living standards will be similiar to those of the average Chinese. Believe it or not, its coming. The days filled with football, talk radio, hot wings will be over for most of the USA/EU.
but the hookers today are so much better looking and the coke is purer.
Apparently you have a much better pool than we do in Detroit, hookers are nasty crack ho's here...
LOL! must be same chicks from '68.
that's what middle class is turning in to.
And I bet that the median wall street male earns many thousands of percent higher wages
A few years back (2006-ish) someone put an early to mid 70's minimum wage thru the filter of real rise with inflation and suggested the min. wage would be 20.00 an hour... for folk to have the same purchasing power. 20 per hour would be 40k per year. All these folk in the post are earning less than a min wage earner in the early to mid 70's. Now calling themselves middle class, no doubt. WHich of course no min wage earner thought of themselves as mid class then.
I'm totally shocked that the Pontiac Aztec failed as an SUV when it obviously could serve as an upscale tent should you lose your home. It's camping-freundlich.
So if the median wage on an inflation adjusted basis hasn't changed, then why is this some sort of social deficit?
Nature abhors a vacuum. Most jobs particklerly the 80% of them in the Service sector are likely overpaid. The fault of non-rising income is the earners. Can anyone seriously consider an insurance clerk's job as deserving more than he gets? How about attorneys who collude to charge exorbitant fees because that's "industry standard" (euphemism for ABA price fixing).
The "slippage" in administrative jobs is about 60%. On that basis, most workers today are vastly overpaid. Who can argue with the AFSCME dictates for government workers extracting usurious wages for their dismal performance?
Barring some major rethinking on the part of employees and what constitutes value from worker, the likelihood is that their wages will continue to drift downward, the more of them that there are.
The only other thing that needs to be said is that the top 10% of workers ---in the Executive offices----- are far more overpaid by a factor o 300 than anyone under them.
BTW isn't it great that the character Walter White in Breaking Bad is still driving his Aztec, even though he is pulling down $5 million/year as a Meth cook?
It's true, because it's that good of a ride!
What if the power goes out?
Of course wages are lower, but only in the USA!
There's two sides to everything. Look how well Chinese wages did over the same time-period.
reversion to the mean
Welcome to poverty, former middle-class bitchez!
http://news.yahoo.com/census-us-poverty-rate-swells-nearly-1-6-142639972.html
It doesn't matter how much money males or females are making when Ferrari has it's best sales year ever selling 7,000 vehicles.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110913-707571.html
Thank you kleptocrats! I'd like my Aztek now.
"Wages" of today include things that were not included 43 years ago, such as: paid health insurance; matching 401k; company cell phones; tuition reimbursement programs; employer child care subsidies; car allowances; more paid holiday's, sick leave, etc; time off to bond with your newly born; google handing out $8,000 to buy a Prius; etc, etc, etc.
Add these payment-in-kind things to the "median worker's" salary and you get a much different picture on "wages" of today.
That's not accurate or meaningful. Along with the addition of some of the things you mentioned, most employers also jettisoned pensions.
So there's a tradeoff.
Basically--fewer people used to work in '68, so it should be pretty easy to understand why they were better paid back then. Coupled with the incredibly punitive tax rates on higher salaries, there was far more "equal" distribution of wages between high-paid and low-paid employees.
If you're saying that "there's a tradeoff", then what I said is quite meaningful. It's not accurate because I didn't lay numbers onto it.
So what you're saying is that we should have fewer people working today and we should have "incredibly punitive tax rates on higher salaries" (70%+ top rate in 1968)? Good luck with that.
More people work today (exclusively driven by women entering the labor force over the decades), and are struggling, has a lot more to do with flat panels in every room, two iphones and ipads, breast implants and botox, charging vacations on their credit cards, $100,000 student loans for a degree in Engrish, two new cars in the driveway of their 3,000 sq ft home with granite countertops and stainless steel appliances that they can't afford--even with government subsidizing the debt. And on and on and on.
All I'm saying is that the wage figures are quite misleading and that people are going to be forced to step down their lifestyles to more reasonable levels--a level that they can actually afford.
So what you're saying is that we should have fewer people working today and we should have "incredibly punitive tax rates on higher salaries" (70%+ top rate in 1968)?
No, I'm not advocating for anything--everything's just fine as far as I'm concerned. I'm describing a major difference that's almost always ignored when people talk about wages "back then."
The highest-paid employees really didn't benefit much from salary increases past a fairly low level, so companies compensated them in different ways rather than just increasing the number of zeroes on the paycheck.
In stark/obvious terms: if the wage-scale is normalized to within a factor of 100x, rather than 1,000,000x, then the lowest-paid earners are getting "more" money in every meaningful relative sense.
moron....they also exclude things like defined benefit pensions and the HIGHER amount of off time people got back then versus the lousy time now. Average joes don't get fkin company cellphones or priuses
If you believe that the average is the average of the bottom 50%, then I suppose you're right.
----
In Feb. 2007, Bank of America announced that it is expanding its program to reimburse $3,000 to associates purchasing a new hybrid vehicle. The program will now be available to more than 185,000 U.S.-based associates.
http://www.hybridcars.com/corporate-incentives.html
----
Even the smallest companies are issuing mobile phones or BlackBerrys to their employees these days. What's that doing to their bottom lines?
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/sep2010/sb20100914_239197.htm
----
These are all millionaire employees!
Even the smallest companies are issuing mobile phones or BlackBerrys to their employees these days. What's that doing to their bottom lines?
It's saving them on the administrative overhead of expense-reporting and reimbursement for those business tools.
At least...that's what it was doing at all the places I've worked where it was done. It was done because it reduced business costs.
Sorry, but MisterMeaner has got to be on drugs. Even from the "rich" public sector, I can see it's the fairy tale used by radio to set the people against each other. Of that list, I've got all of one flat panel hooked up to a home computer and I've charged a vacation once (the next state over for a weekend - not 2 weeks in France). Forget tuition reimbusement or company anything...hell, even my pension has been self-funded since 2003!
In addition to my consulting firm, where we pay 90% of health care and 15 out of 20 for cell service, I teach executive mgmt at a large university where about 2/3 get tuition reimbursement. I know this because I have to fill out forms for them. These are not rich people (not yet).
It sounds like you're living within your means. Good for you. BTW, your pension should be self funded, should it not?
I stand by what I said: the nature of "wages" of 1968 are quite different from the "wages" of 2011. You can't just compare one with the other, adjust for inflation, lay it on a graph, and make sweeping conclusions.
You can if you want to, I suppose.
You're right in that, to some degree, it's apple and oranges, but there is just so much misinformation out there. What the class warriors on the right don't know about how things actually work for the average public sector employee works could fill a very thick book. They're as bad as the class warriors on the left who think every small businessperson is like the asshats at GM flying private planes to DC beg-a-thons. Using a small subset of abusers to pound on the vast majority who aren't like that is dishonest and I think we'd all do alot better if the truth would escape from this sea of lies more often.
the statistics of Men Vs. women at least in the united states are in fact much more complicated than presented. It isn't as bad as it seems.
As to “Why Boys Fail,” James Whitmire writes:”The blue-collar jobs that once supported families are drying up, affecting males more than females. So if a focused effort isn't made to address boys' needs, as was done successfully a generation ago for girls, many boys' futures will be grim, and the nation's ability to compete will slide.
“Two girls for every boy may sound good in Jan and Dean's classic Surf City song, but it’s not a healthy ratio for America's colleges and workplaces.”
Overall, women have surpassed men in terms of completing secondary and post-secondary education with the gender gap almost completely reversed. In 2006, 10.3% of males and 8.3% of females dropped out of high school. In 2005/2006, women earned 62.1% of Associate's degrees, 57.5% of Bachelor's degrees, 60.0% of Master's degrees, and 48.9% of Doctorates. In 2016/2017, women are projected to earn 64.2% of Associate's degrees, 59.9% of Bachelor's degrees, 62.9% of Master's degrees, and 55.5% of Doctorates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States#Sex
Women: 58% of college graduates, 20% of engineering graduates
A House subcommittee looks into narrowing the gender gap in STEM, an important priority, given the diminished male presence on college campuses. From Inside Higher Education:
The fact that women are underrepresented in a number of STEM fields shows itself in the proportions of degrees granted to each gender. In 2006, women earned 58 percent of all bachelor’s degrees, but only 20 percent of computer science bachelor’s degrees, 21 percent of physics degrees and 20 percent of engineering degrees, according to data from the National Science Foundation. The same data also found that on the whole, women hold more than half of science and technology degrees, with women earning 77 percent of psychology degrees, 62 percent of biological sciences degrees, and 54 percent of social sciences degrees.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates et al. continue to testify before the U.S. House Committee on Science and Technology, calling for Congress to reform the H-1B visa program so that Microsoft and other companies can continue to bring in even more foreign workers into the U.S., while institutions such as M.I.T. counsel their young males to forego studies in engineering because “there just aren’t jobs available in the field.” Uh huh.
the majority of those "blue collar jobs" men took in the past didn't require college educations - this is not often mentioned, that men took up jobs without even graduating high school, let alone getting a degree.
another point rarely mentioned is some females choose to get degrees and professional jobs so as to not be reliant on a male income / partner - which was much more difficult for them to do decades ago. . . not needing to be in a relationship, ie "financial independence" is increasingly attractive to some females, as has been the case for many males in the past.
women aren't generally good enough at math nor like it enough to want to go into Engineering. Fuck the House subcommittee.
"Science and technology" is not real science if women hold over half the degrees.
lol, I guess Chemistry ain't a real science.
Nice to see you expanding your hate horizons. Maybe next time you go speed dating, you can open up with that one. There will be much lulz to be had.
Shadowstats CPI calculator gives the following.
http://www.shadowstats.com/inflation_calculator?amount1=20&y1=1988&m1=6&y2=2011&m2=7&calc=Find+Out
$20 in 1988 is worth $38 today using BLS calculations, or $130 today using John Williams calculations.
Let's test this out...
Sniff test...no way! It can not be possible that $20 has inflated 6.5 times in 23 years.
Personal experience test...in high school in 1988, minimum wage at $3.35/hour I could fill up my gas tank for about $15 and have a deluxe burger, fries, milkshake for about $4 and change. There goes my $20. Today I can fill up my gas tank for about $75 and get a deluxe burger, fries, and milkshake for about $15. That is 90% of my $100. Personal experience says inflation is about 5x, OK that is a ballpark check for a correct assessment.
One more test... if we use 5x for a baseline than $3.35/hour should be $16.75/hour. Or if we use Shadowstats number of 6.5x, than $3.35/hour should be $21.78 as a minimum wage.
My son is mucking about in the minimum wage pool at about $7.80 (close if not exact). That means that an equivalent wage I was making in high school would have been $1.20 per hour. About 30% of what I made.
Lest someone flame out on this and start blaming businesses or the other side, blame me for blaming businesses, the root of this is not businesses the root is fiat currency and it's associated abasement by the FED. Direct appropriate anger to the appropriate place. We are all in the margin squeeze together. It is ugly.
My personal experience backs up John Williams numbers pretty closely giving consideration for locality differences.
Zadok
Zadok- Let me help you in a more obvious way. I am 60 years old. As a child gas sold for 19-22 cents. So for a silver quarter you could buy over one gallon of gasoline. A US quarter of today, buys just 1 fourteenth or fifteenth of a gallon of gasoline. But wait, a silver quarter from my childhood is roughly worth $7.50, that is good for almost 2 gallons of gasoline today! So, should talk about not only inflation but long term investments?
@GoingLoonie
Correct, there is a lot to be said for the 'priced in gold' arguement. My post was getting long, arguement is sound, always there are variations due to localities, distortions of the particular moment in time, etc but it is in the ball park for sure regardless.
Tough times abound, no different from end of Rome, Weimar, etc, etc... some different decisions might have had different results, however those bad breaks, theft, personal and institutional all conspired to take all that was so carefully laid up. Ever wonder what it might have been like, look around, differing only in the details and technology. People are the same. One has to make decisions on what is, not what could have been. Honesty, compassion, loyalty have all resulted in some of the worst financial outcomes. Pick friends, spouses, etc very, very carefully. I have my integrity and I don't lose sleep over doing someone wrong. I like that but the reality is that it doesnt do much for me at the end of the month paying the bills.
Zadok
support, respect of trusted friends, spouses & integrity > monies, every time.
great post.
According to radio talk show host Tom Sullivan and a caller struggling to keep a small business alive, for every job that pays the employee $50,000, it costs the employer $75,000.
I think thats a bit high, but not that for off, I know what we called a fully burdened $13.00 hourly employee (hourly wage plus insurance, unemployment etc) actually costs us $17.30
Some day there will be Pontiac Aztec clubs, with 20 or more Aztec get togethers, with famlies included. I used to drive a 1969 chevy caprice station wagon in college. 396 engine and electric windows. When another wagon would drive by me a hand would come out the window and wave. I would wave back with excitement. That's how it starts.
Yeah - right next to the Edsel club. F'n ugliest car ever made - and there's a lot of competition for that spot.
If Americans could only take the first five words of our national anthem to heart - "Oh, say can you see...? Of course, they never will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jQT7_rVxAE
I will throw out another statistic vs. personal experience.
My personal experience is much more along the line of 23-24% unemployment rate, 9% would be childs play compared to what I am dealing with.
In summary, the more education you have the less opportunity, once in the unemployment pool you can not get out, try the old school trick of showing up at a business of any size in a suit with resume in hand...if you get past the guard you get the very cold shoulder if not the police. I guess they tired of the near riots of job fairs and such.
As a well educated and high end resume (engineering), try trading down, who will touch you when they have so many others that will take less than it takes to survive.
Yes, lets define survive. That means eat, place to sleep, lockable doors for security, keeps the rain out, transportation, pay minimum bills, fuel, tires, and expenses that crop up. No dates with the wife, no vacation, no health care, no savings, no backup, no magazine subscriptions, rationed and planned trips to grocery store, bottom line is minimum.
I have reduced to a number that is break even to survive for a family of four. 21 months and 5 days later I have yet to find it. Scams and complicated pay schemes that are long on promise and short on delivery are plentiful. Plenty of talk, but not offers regarding making less than it takes to drive in and pay for transportation expenses let alone pay for the rest of the expenses. Business trials all fail for one of several issues, typically they can be reduced to lack of customers or customers that can not or will not pay, lack of future confidence of stability, or doing it the way the government demands kills it in the planning stage.
Wife has been forced out of house into work force to survive, survive it the right word.
Appropriate money management + some bad circumstantial breaks + no opportunity to rebuild = individual with not much to lose and growing quite weary of the games and lies.
Keep in mind, I am not blaming businesses.
Root cause, failure of citizens to keep the republic. Fiat currency and associated abuse, Federal Reserve, planned implosion.
Where is Andrew Jackson when we need him? Probably could not be elected today. Not complaining without merit. Eyes open, mind in gear, history repeating, similarities abound, try to be alert and ready working with what you've got to work with.
Zadok
The absolute "truthiest" statement I have ever read on ZeroHedge in 3 years.
I have lived this and to some extent still am.
BRAVO !
Unbelievable. All my friends will think Zadok is my ZH handle.
Zerozulu
Great post again ... so are you saying you are an unemployed engineer? Decontent the resume is a truth. Funny thing was I decontented for a job I wasn't sure I wanted anyway they made me offer but when they found out I left off stuff like an MBA and a 3 month management position they freaked out. Their loss.
@ RaymondKHessel
Yes sir, in an environment where the sheeple have decided that we don't want to build and develop new things, we just want to 'service' those who do...guess what, there is not much use for us 'over-educated' productive types.
I frequently hear if from my employed aquaintences, HR or small business (all inclusive) are only driving one thing...wages down. No way to compete if the only thing that matters is accepting less than it takes to live. Anyone who takes that is not qualified in my book. Apparently they can not perform basic math. The people that have to work with them say variations of the same thing...where do they find these people, they cause more discontent and sometimes damage than whatever wage reduction they could have possibly gotten out of them.
I have done that, use smaller words, bigger text. Something like if you can't write it with crayons and bright colors, it does not belong on your resume. It has gone on so long I have tried all kinds of different things, same results. When you complete for almost nothing, margin squeeze had driven all the profit out, and all that matters is that 10 cents per hour, well then, you can have it.
I had one experience in another state, I estimated there were between 20 and 25 thousand (yes, thousand) applicants for 20 jobs.
The flip side is that they could get expertise now for a bargain price what 3 times the price could not have purchased 5 or 6 years ago, but that is not the way it is going.
Devolution...truly unpleasant.
Zadok
No Pontiac Aztek but I did buy an Michigan assembled 2012 Ford Focus. Its quite the car - 40MPG highway/29 overall, good power, super ride and handling like a much more expensive car, great interior, geat service at my dealer. I call it a cheater car - I can have my cake and eat it too. Yes Ford is making one of the best small cars in the world right here in the USA. Go figger. USA manufacturing is not dead yet, they just need to get it right more often.
Many Americans find themselves in the plight of early 20th century immigrants - thrown into a world that is only remotely similar to the one they are used to. Now, however, the opportunities for improvement are becoming more and more rare while those that seek them are steadily growing in numbers. The future scenario looks bleak indeed; who is actively rectifying the ills that plague us? No one is a good starter....
The median average Chinese worker is doing also very well..
thanks for him !
What's the percentage of those working women willing to individually provide for a family and solely support her husband and their kids? Zero?! Zero, you say?! Oh, well, there is a long way to equality then in this feminist world. In the meantime, let these working women continue to pretend being empowered at their pink jobs, for they need the income to carry on shopping whilst waiting for a man to pay their credit card debts.
Most working families I know would love to have the ability to have one parent stay at home.
Everyone single family I know that employs child care does it because they need the income to to pay for basic living expenses - not to pay for trinkets and vacations.
hyperbolic nonsense.
I have 5 close female friends who choose to support the "family" - 2 engineers, one CPA, two doctors in specialty practices - only two have children, but all support their partners who do more "creative" work - those partners also tend to such things as beekeeping, raising foods, etc. - quite the "role reversal" hmm?
I also know many folk, female and male, who didn't opt for the socially condoned "marriage" but maintain long-term partnerships OR enjoy being single, none of whom are considered "wealthy" but they're sane and happy, even in these times, mainly because they've accustomed themselves to doing with "less" in a consumer whirlwind culture that just makes people miserable trying to "keep up."
A stay home mom was guarantee of a mentally and physically healthy new generation.
You nailed it! My wife & I chose the next best option- both working, one of us always home when our daughter not in school.
I posted some specific, hard numbers backed up with experience hoping we could have a good discussion but it has devolved into something else.
The first step to solving a problem is to define it. What are you trying to solve? This can be the most thorny proposition to achieve but any attempt to circumvent in a curcumstance where you actually want to solve the problem it will ultimately result in going back and doing it for real.
Neutralizaion can be achieved very easily. There are many techniques but one of the easiest is to provoke an emotion that clouds judgement and causes offense. Getting that offended individual back on track can be exceedingly difficult and will try you patience.
Without discipline and good judgement, we fall into the self-neutralization catagory without effort.
What is the problem that we all seem to talk around? Offenses of this and that are overwhelming but what actually needs to be solved?
Here is my proposal. We have lost the republic.
Sample subset statements supporting the root issue: We have lost common knowledge of what a republic is. Government has devolved to institutional theft for self aggrandizement and wealth collection at the expense of the "sheeple".
The next question is: "Do you want it back"
Followed by: If so, how do we go about it?"
Notice that the Federal Reserve has not entered into the question yet. It appears to me to be that it is not part of the strategy but rather a tactical front used for what it can accomplish not what it is.
Referencing the previous thread regarding minimum wage. The arguments can go on and on, but it really is a tenth (or more) level detail that stems from a distorted circumstance driven by a failure to retain the republic. Your statements may be TRUE but are they USEFUL at this point in time? Bottom line is that a government dictate of a minimum wage has no place in a free society. That should be the end of the arguement, to take it further is to neutralize yourselves of the energy that could be better applied toward addressing the tactical tools (like the Federal Reserve) for the strategic purposes of recovering the Republic.
I am appealing for some thought and emotional discipline toward goals we can all benefit from. Let's not give our energy willingly to the opposition.
Zadok
I yield to oncoming AND merging traffic.
Thanks tmosley. He does sound very threatened by a woman who has more brains and ability than him. Yes, I know that type well. Have a great day. Its nice to get confirmation that not all men are jerks.
:o)
I'm the stay at home guy for the lady of the house who wants to work...
See def of Sarcasm above. Embrace the light; forsake the hysteria
Easy fix to raise the average wage or salary at least by 3X: The wimmin should stay at home and raise the children.
The men staying at home and taking care of kids has---guess what?? Lowered their Testosterone!
Duh....
no doofus, the lower testosterone can be attributed to many factors, including obesity, excessive alcohol consumption, allopathic drugs, environmental pollutions, toxins in food, phytoestrogens. . .
did you know that GMO soy is in most supermarket foods in SOME form?
def. sar' cas'm --- using an ironic phrase to convey contempt.