| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 11/23 |
| 2007/5/26-30 [Health/Men] UID:46763 Activity:kinda low |
5/26 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18868904 A generation ago, American men in their thirties had median annual incomes of about $40,000 compared with men of the same age who now make about $35,000 a year, adjusted for inflation. \_ After unions and WWII, manufacturing jobs overpaid for low-skill work. Now globalization is letting anyone else with the same set of skills do those jobs, for relatively less in wages (though well paid in their home country.) Getting an education and a job in industries that are America's strengths is the path to prosperity. Cutting student loan subsidies was a huge mistake. \_ After unions and WWII, manufacturing jobs overpaid for low-skill work. Now globalization is letting anyone else with the same set of skills do those jobs, for relatively less in wages (though well paid in their home country.) Getting an education and a job in industries that are America's strengths is the path to prosperity. Cutting student loan subsidies was a huge mistake. \_ Getting an education in what? Software? Bad idea. Medicine? Bad idea. I guess we'll all have to be attorneys, huh? Seriously, what would you recommend an 18 year old be educated in? I can't think of anything that's not threatened except maybe soldiers, FBI, NSA, and such. \_ Nursing, surgery, auditing, anything that requires the person to actually be onsite in America to do the job. There should be a huge demand for medical professionals as the population ages, but you don't want to be in something like radiology, that can be outsourced. ER doctor is probably safe. \_ I am not sure medicine is a good place to be. I understand your point, but the reality is that the American standard of living is not sustainable no matter the profession. Global competition will whittle away at the standard of living in all Western countries in all professions - even doctors, lawyers, and engineers. So why is it worth it to spend an ever-increasing amount of $$$ on education when it doesn't guarantee you anything? If only the strong will survive, then I think the strong will make it no matter what initials follow their names. Bill Gates never even graduated college. I am not worried about the strong. I am worried about Joe Blow Cal State grad and his some-college wife. What will become of them? Will they have to move to Calcutta to find a lifestyle they find satisfactory? Will some Eastern Euro doctor move here to a 2 BR house and think he has it made, such as is happening in Spain? I don't weep for the MDs driving Acuras instead of Porsches, but it will have a trickle down effect. I think the idea that getting an education somehow makes one "safe" or helps ensure one of maintaining his current lifestyle (forget about improving on it) is dated. I think an education is for personal satisfaction only at this point, because, really, how often does the average employee at the average firm employ the depth of his education? I know quantum mechanics. Maybe some other guy doesn't. It won't help me sell any more cars or perform more audits or even stitch up any more ER patients. \_ My point was getting a college degree for the knowledge economy vs. HS diploma or drop out. Still only 25% get a 4 year degree. There won't be enough low-skill, lower middle class jobs to soak up the rest. http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Ranking/2003/R02T040.htm Manufacturing jobs have actually increased last 2 years, as they find niches, do high value, quick turn-around work. Our economy is huge and will adapt, but 25% with bachelors degree will not cut it for 21st cent. \_ I see. I agree with that. However, what I am seeing is that even people with graduate degrees are struggling to maintain a middle-class lifestyle. You almost need to be a two income family with both spouses having a graduate or professional degree just to have the standard of living a motivated high school graduate had just 40 years ago. I do not see education as being the answer. I think we are actually overeducated as it is for the numbers and types of jobs available. Many of my colleagues have PhDs and find themselves overqualified or "stuck" in jobs that they did not need a PhD to do. |
| www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18868904 Don't count on it Median income dropping for men, slowing for households, report says Image: Couple working together at home Tim Pannell/Corbis The American dream has always held that each generation will enjoy a higher standard of living than the previous one, and that is still true, as measured by household income. MSNBC staff and news service reports The American dream has always held that each generation will enjoy a higher standard of living than the previous one, and that is still true, as measured by household income. But the generational gains are slowing, and the increased participation of women in the work force is the only thing keeping the dream alive, according to an analysis of Census data released Friday. A generation ago, American men in their thirties had median annual incomes of about $40,000 compared with men of the same age who now make about $35,000 a year, adjusted for inflation. To be sure, household incomes rose during the same period, but only because there are more full-time working women, the report said. "This suggests the up-escalator that has historically ensured that each generation would do better than the last may not be working very well," said the report by Isabel Sawhill, senior fellow at The Brookings Institution, and John Morton, director of the Economic Mobility Project. The report also found that many countries, including Denmark, Norway, Finland and Canada, offer far more economic mobility than in the United States when measuring by the income differences between generations. While income is not the only measure of economic mobility, the findings challenge the historical presumption that each successive generation will be wealthier, said Morton. "Today's data suggest that during a 30-year period of economic expansion, a rising tide did not lift all boats," Morton said in a release accompanying the report, "Economic Mobility: Is the American Dream Alive and Well?" Of course, the men who run American companies don't have too much to complain about. CEO pay increased to 262 times the average worker's pay in 2005 from 35 times in 1978, according to the report's analysis of Congressional Budget Office statistics. Neighbours admire a rented wedding car, AFP - Getty Images The pay gap between executives and the average worker continues to fuel outrage on Capitol Hill and among corporate shareholders nationwide. Many shareholder proposals to tie executive pay to a company's operating or market performance are introduced at corporate annual meetings every year. Most Democrats favor giving shareholders at public corporations a voice in executive pay packages, while the White House and many Republicans favor a laissez-faire approach that includes regulators ensuring executive pay is transparent to workers and investors. US inflation-adjusted household incomes rose only 9 percent from 1974 to 2004 -- a severe slowdown when compared with the 32 percent increase from 1964 to 1994. Going back to 1820, per capita gross domestic product in the United States has grown an average of 52 percent for each 30-year generation, according to the report. But since 1973, median family income has grown only 06 percent per year, a rate that produces just a 17 percent increase over a generation. "Thus, unless the rate of economic growth increases, the next generation will experience an improvement in its standard of living that is only one-third as large as the historical average for earlier generations," the report said. Over the next 18 months, the Pew project, which started in February, will continue to unveil analyses of data about the status of US economic mobility. Planned releases include a fact book containing mobility comparisons by race, gender, immigration and other measures, and an analysis of the impact of shifting federal investments in education and other domestic policies. |
| www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Ranking/2003/R02T040.htm The confidence interval gives a range of values likely to include the population true value. The smaller the confidence interval the more precise the estimate of the characteristic of interest. An "N" entry in the estimate, lower bound, and upper bound columns indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small. |