Wage Growth Slows Across the Country (axios.com) 173
An anonymous reader writes: Wages in the United States are going up, but their growth is shrinking, says Glassdoor chief economist Andrew Chamberlain. Wages should be rising an average of 3%-4% given the tightness of the job market, Chamberlain says. According to official data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, wage growth was a lower 2.6% in February. Glassdoor data -- based on a survey of 100,000 salaries posted by the jobs site every month -- show even lower growth, shrinking to just 1% last month.
H1B Program a success (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The report is not about IT wages specifically
TFA is a mishmash of BLS statistics about the broader economy, and survey data from Glassdoor which skews toward tech.
The 2.6% figure is for the entire economy. H1Bs affect tech, but are negligible for the economy as a whole, so that is NOT the main reason for slow wage growth. Most likely reason is that labor availability is a lot more flexible than the official unemployment numbers predict, because there are a lot of long term unemployed being pulled back into the workforce.
Not just the H1-B Program (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, anyone else find it telling that the phrase used to describe succeeding without help describes a physically impossible event? It's like a bad joke everybody ran with.
Re: (Score:2)
According to the same source as TFA, H1B workers don't depress native wages. In fact, they are on average paid slightly above market rate.
https://www.glassdoor.com/rese... [glassdoor.com]
Re: (Score:2)
According to the same source as TFA, H1B workers don't depress native wages. In fact, they are on average paid slightly above market rate.
https://www.glassdoor.com/rese... [glassdoor.com]
They certainly do depress wages for tech jobs, as your own citation states:
By contrast, there are many examples of jobs where H1B workers usually earn less than U.S. workers — despite legal requirements that employers pay “prevailing wages” to H1B workers. Four examples of these types of jobs are shown in the table below: data scientist, financial analyst, programmer analyst, and software engineer. In these cases, H1B workers usually earn less than otherwise similar U.S. workers. For example, among software engineers, H1B workers earned less than or equal to U.S. workers in every city we examined, ranging from equal median salaries in Seattle to -17 percent less in Chicago. Similarly, H1B salaries for programmer analysts were lower in nine of the 10 cities we examined, ranging from -1 percent in Atlanta to -28 percent in Chicago and Washington, D.C. (H1B pay for programmer analysts was 7 percent higher in one city: Philadelphia).
Re: (Score:3)
Everyone knows that the investor class and C-suite are the only ones that deserve any of the pie. If you want a raise, pull yourself up by your bootstraps and start your own multi-billion-dollar international corporation!
And if you ever hear a C-suit suit at your company enthuse about the book _Crossing the Chasm_, circulate your resume immediately!
That is EXACTLY what it prescribes. right at the end of one of the later chapters, and the key to both its success as a book and the crashing of the companies wh
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's cheap-labor capitalism at work....this is what the 1% have wanted since slavery and early industrial times.
Re: (Score:2)
Take your lumps for Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
Like the stock market losses due to recent attempts to initiate a trade war and the wealth transfers to the 1% through tax "reform," this downturn is just part of Making America Great Again, and you should accept your losses with pride for the glory of the Dear Leader. Things will get better...real soon...any day now...
Re:Take your lumps for Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
1) There's every indication that this is a huge stock market bubble, also the stock market isn't the economy.
2) Lowering taxes isn't always good; it's going to lead to cuts in services and a huge deficit (if you care about that sort of thing).
3) 5% wage growth in 2 years isn't good; if wages were growing at the nominal 3-4% each year, in two years they should have grown 6.09-8.16% due to compounding.
So, uh, yeah give him credit for doing things poorly and setting up a big stock market bubble? Sure.
Re:Take your lumps for Trump (Score:4, Informative)
The Dow was 19,826 on the day Donald Trump took office, and it's 24,005 as of a few minutes ago. Now math is not my best subject, but I'm not sure that's a 40% increase.
Oops, make that 23,963 as of 10:58am PST.
For the record, the economic growth during the Obama Administration was faster and steadier. He was the first president since before WWII to not take us into a recession at any point in his presidency.
Oops, make that 23,941 as of 11:01am PST.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow - how are you editing your posts?
Also, not much reason to update it so often. It usually does fluxuate a bit during the day
Re: (Score:2)
Oops, make that 23,783, as of 12:01 PST.
The Dow has dropped 724 points and it's still a ways to go before the bell.
This has been the longest the Dow has gone without reaching a new high in five years. Since Trump's tax bill passed, the DOW has lost 3000 points.
Re: (Score:2)
The Dow was 19,826 on the day Donald Trump took office, and it's 24,005 as of a few minutes ago. Now math is not my best subject, but I'm not sure that's a 40% increase.
If 24,005 is not 40% more than 19,826 to you, you're obviously doing fake math then or not using alternative statistics. You probably don't think Trump had a record turn out at his inauguration either do you.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, you don't seem to remember it either. Job growth, wage growth and GDP growth started in 2010 and did not stop going up for six years.
Wow, you really don't remember that time at all, do you? Wage growth started rising in 2010 and continued
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And it's been downhill ever since.
And you know, of course, that during the same period of the Obama presidency, the Dow went up by a larger percentage, right? Sixty-one percent, in the first year, in fact.
Overall, the total increase in the Dow during the Obama administration was 231%.
Re:Take your lumps for Trump (Score:4, Interesting)
Time will tell, but so far, we are still on a trajectory which is much improved over the last administration's. Remember that.
Not an improved trajectory, just further along the same trajectory (at least until recently). To bring this article up to date:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/1... [cnn.com]
The bull market is 109 months old. Trump owns 17 of them.
Including these months:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0... [nytimes.com]
Re: Take your lumps for Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
Turning the economy around would mean tanking it. We can all be glad he hasn't done that.
Give the guy some time, he's showing a lot of "progress" on that front recently.
Re: (Score:1)
I can't even begin to understand the mind of a person who thinks any of that is true. What curves has he "bent upwards"? Stock indexes and unemployment curves look identical before and after his inauguration, the slope barely changes from what was happening under the Obama administration. If anything, he has managed to cause some big drops in stocks with the stupid tariff fight with China he pulled out of his ass.
I get it that you want your side to "win", but at least take a moment look at the facts with an
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck did he do? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing? You've heard of nothing? Maybe you need to take a closer look at that claim because I think you are either being misleading on purpose or you are just swallowing what ever your media sources of choice have been feeding you.
For example... The Tax bill... SURELY you remember that? After all, the media and the democrats told a pile of bald faced lies about that one. If you get a paycheck, You got a tax cut, check your check stubs.
That's just ONE thing he got though congress, there is more... Not
Re: (Score:2)
Most people got less than $1000/year [nytimes.com] in temporary tax reduction, paid for by debt. That doesn't do shit to the economy. Long term, every expert says that this tax change will significantly harm the economy.
That's it? That's all you got? Rich people got lower taxes, so all of a sudden, the economy is awesome? If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Re: (Score:2)
Rich people? Is that all you have in your play book? Class envy?
So you are saying a corporate tax cut won't have any positive effects on the economy? All it needs to do is 1% GDP growth improvemnt to break even.
Guess what, we are getting that.... https://tradingeconomics.com/u... [tradingeconomics.com] GDP growth under Trump has averaged above this target. The stock market has been doing *really* well overall. Unemployment continues to fall with the labor participation rate staying steady, after 8 years of falling under Oba
Re: (Score:2)
Here is a graph of historical US wage growth https://tradingeconomics.com/u... [tradingeconomics.com]
Based on the 5 year chart, wage increases steadily dropped from 2014 until around November 2017, when increases bottomed out at close to zero. Since the election, wages have recovered nicely. There are dips and peaks in the chart, but the current trend is very encouraging.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I meant November 2016 - not 2017. Wages have been increasing nicely since around Nov 2016.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an interesting interpretation. To me it looks like wage growth ranges from 4~6% from 2014 to 2016 before it begins to drop. It takes 2 big falls, one in early 2016 and one in late 2016, before it begins to recover. It eventually recovers to about 5% before beginning the drop mentioned in TFS.
If you look at the 10 year chart, wage growth generally stays in the range of 2~6% from mid 2010 to late 2016. So the current trend is still well within that range, although I don't see how a drop toward what app
Re: (Score:2)
What you really need to look at is real compensation per hour [stlouisfed.org] because of all the non-wage compensation going on (health insurance, etc.). It is pretty flat since 2015.
The civillian labor force [stlouisfed.org] flatlined from 2008-2012, then start to a weak climb. Labor force participation rate [stlouisfed.org] only stopped falling in 2015 (the same time that total compensation flatlined).
My thought is that despite the low and flatlining unemployment rate, there are still people who are being sucked back into the labor force by availabilit
Stop abandoning the working class (Score:5, Insightful)
I've noticed a trend where everybody's in support of the government stepping in to help out until it's somebody else. Then it becomes teh Socialisms. This needs to stop. The working class needs solidarity. We need to stop pretending we can make it on our own and that there's no class warfare going on. We're getting picked apart here. Fighting among ourselves for scraps while the ruling class laughs in our face.
Policy wise this means:
Nobody left behind. Everyone gets cared for and we stop complaining about having to pay for the occasional lazy surfer dude who doesn't work much or at all.
Re: (Score:3)
+1
Re: (Score:2)
College for everyone
Shouldn't that be Collage for those that can pass the entrance exams and technological school for any who wants it? Lots of people like my brother where a collage education would have helped him less then the 2 years he spent learning how to be a glazier did. Plumbers, electricians, welders etc are usually in demand, especially for fixing the infrastructure, the trades pay decently and for some are a better career path then collage.
Yeah, (Score:2)
Vocational Schools are fine as well, but that can be handled by the community colleges. What I don't want to see are a bunch of ITT tech style "schools" that drain money from the public coffers in exchange for not teaching. That's easy enough to avoid. Just fund the Community College's vocational programs.
But again, we're getting into the weeds here. The point is that if people want to
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just splitting hairs, but rather avoiding the scenario where you need a collage degree to serve coffee at Starbucks. Even without tuition, going to university can be expensive, especially if you have to go any distance, and ideally a university education should only be required in cases where it is actually a requirement.
Are 'ITT tech style "schools"' actually a problem where you are? Here (BC) the vocational/technology schools all seem to be run by the government. Though I do admit I haven't looke
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't that be Collage for those that can pass the entrance exams and technological school for any who wants it? Lots of people like my brother where a collage education would have helped him less then the 2 years he spent learning how to be a glazier did. Plumbers, electricians, welders etc are usually in demand, especially for fixing the infrastructure, the trades pay decently and for some are a better career path then collage.
I completely agree with you. I'd mod you up if I had points. Not everyone needs to go to College to go into the various trades that pay very well.
Life is about more than work (Score:2)
As for why you want a well educated populace, well they're much less likely to make stup
Re: (Score:1)
Most people don't need college. I have a BS and MA degrees. My current, self-employed job required no college education, only a few months reading books and listening to podcasts on the subject. I'm on track to retire by 50. If I didn't have 60k left in student loans, I'd be able to retire in my early 40s (I'm 31 now). The friends I have who stayed at their programming jobs plan to retire at retirement age. They're all making more money (80-95k range) than me, yet I'm saving over double what they are.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Wait, so the wealthy are pulling strings to keep their wealth but we can fix this by stopping immigration?
I...don't think that's the solution you're looking for.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As a Libertarian, I have NO problem with free and open immigration. I would accept just about anyone who wants to work in the US here. I would limit immigrants from social welfare programs for a period of 15 years or until they complete all requirements and become full citizens of the US. I would also allow fast tracking people who serve in the military or guard.
What I have a problem with is people sneaking in. But that seems to be a hard distinction for some people to make.
Re: (Score:1)
Nope. Ain't nobody saying let the borders be free. That's simply not true. The difference is how we belive illegal immigrants should be treated.
So what are sanctuary cities saying then when they actively try to promote and defend open borders?
Re:Huh, wonder why (Score:4, Insightful)
"Who aren't causing trouble"
Being here illegally is causing trouble. Why? Because it encourages others to do the same, bypassing our laws. They all aren't paying taxes. They all aren't behaving themselves, They all aren't doing what you're claiming all of them are doing.
Hell you can be arrested for felonies and be released back into the public in sanctuary cities. You can be deported multiple times and sneak back in and commit crimes and be release back into society.
You are block grouping a variety of people together, conflating them as a single unit and giving them a pass in doing so. You're partially why, as a group, they are causing problems, because people like yourself make no distinction between breaking the law, and not breaking the law.
At least my solution gives no excuses for crossing the boarder without permission. You're just excusing it as if it were nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Illegal immigrant, noun: a term used by the descendants of invaders, living on stolen land, to refer the the descendants of native inhabitants.
2) Every latin american country south of Texas has been overthrown by the United States at least once, invaded, or suffered CIA-backed death squads. Or all of the above. You want your taxes raised to the stratosphere to pay reparations, or do you want the
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you went to school in Tucson or somewhere like that, to get so screwed up about basic definitions?
1. Let's try Wikipedia: "Illegal immigration is the illegal entry of a person or a group of persons across a country's border, in a way that violates the immigration laws of the destination country, with the intention to remain in the country."
2. If they have an issue, they can take it to the UN or the World Court or something. Individuals breaking the law isn't "reparations" for unproven accusations.
Li
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you're willfully obtuse. The entirety of the United States is land built on that which was stolen from the native populace, including pretty much every treaty ever signed. So nativists can fuck right off on the entire subject of "illegal immigration".
1) As if the ability to take a cause to a higher court has fuck-all to do with the justification of a cause. Palestinians have a right to move back to all the homes sto
Re: (Score:2)
Guess what? The "native population" also "stole" various lands from each other in the same manner. So you have no real point.
The United States is a country. It has laws. Violating them is literally the definition of illegal. You can't alter that basic fact.
Re: (Score:2)
Tired bullshit excuse is tired. And willfully ignorant - do you honestly think that every single tribe was forcing other tribes off their land? Many of them had been in the same place for thousands of years at total peace until invaders showed up.
And again, you can fuck right off on your fa
Re: (Score:2)
You should really get something for that rage of yours before you break something.
Re: (Score:2)
You really should pull your head out of your ass before it gets stuck there, permanently.
Re: (Score:3)
Why we don't deport actual criminals in California. So that isn't really accurate either. Nice try though.
Re: (Score:2)
What distinction is made between illegal immigrants and those that are here legally?
What distinction is made between illegal immigrants and those waiting to come here legally?
The net result is that illegal immigrants are often given preferential treatment to those waiting to get in. They are here after all, while those waiting for legal status are not allowed in at all.
Re: (Score:2)
I am saying the boarders should be open, but with a gate for people to register and check in as they enter legally. We pretty much already have open boarders right now, except for those that want to come here legally. Those people are screwed while we give preferential treatment to those that cross our boarders without permission.
Re: (Score:2)
Now I'm confused... Was this discussion about immigration policy or bed-and-breakfast policy?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You understand that the National Guard serves the state to which they reside and not the Federal government.
False. NG serves a dual role, and are deployable by either the governor of their state (because they are organized at the state level and function as a state militia when needed in that capacity), or the federal government (because they are, in fact, a reserve component of the U.S. armed forces , under the department of defense).
Calling the illegal immigration issue a flood gate is also vastly overstating the issue since illegal immigration is significantly slowed and has been for several years....
You are correct on this point. Illegal entry is at a 40 year low. Further, the biggest issue currently in illegal immigration is not people sneaking across the border. It is foreign
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more like the rhetoric of the 30s. Traitors to the country, opposing the great leaders attempts to protect the nation from the existential threat of immigrants.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a good thing that "Anonymous Coward" is a well respected source of reliable information! Take that GlassDoor!
Re: (Score:2)
Where's all that tax cut money (Score:5, Insightful)
that the rich are supposed to be using to pay Americans higher wages?
Re:Where's all that tax cut money (Score:5, Informative)
Caymens, Switzerland, Panama, [offshore destination of choice]. Oh, and for some of them it's a down payment on a bigger yacht.
Re: (Score:2)
that the rich are supposed to be using to pay Americans higher wages?
Caymens, Switzerland, Panama, [offshore destination of choice]. Oh, and for some of them it's a down payment on a bigger yacht.
Is that down payment being paid to other rich who are handcrafting yachts out of gold bars and stock certificates? If the grandparent post is dividing the population into "rich" and "Americans", where is the dividing line?
I would have thought that buying a yacht qualifies as "rich" paying wages to "not rich", via a yacht building company whose owner might be either.
Maybe the grandparent expects the "rich" should literally toss bundles of cash at random. It seems to me that creating luxury items, and especia
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't realize that the only input to a yacht was manual labor! It's not like it takes expensive materials, involves payments for IP, uses automated machinery (ala capital) or anything else. Boat creation is not a heavy job creator.
I don't expect the rich to voluntarily do that, no. Whether it makes sense to force them to is a different question.
Re: (Score:2)
it takes expensive materials, involves payments for IP, uses automated machinery
You've just dramatically increased support for my point. It's not just a wealthy yacht maker getting rich off the sale of that yacht because that yacht maker has lots of suppliers. Those suppliers employ miners, refiners, forgers, skilled craftsmen for the expensive materials (hint, the reason they're "expensive" materials is that they involve a lot of labor to create. Those "payments for IP" go to companies that employ designers, lawyers, salespeople, receptionists, security guards, cafeteria workers, and
Re:Where's all that tax cut money (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of companies gave one-time bonuses to employees, while themselves getting a year-after-year benefit. They probably see this as a bribe to employees to convince them that the tax cuts are what they want too.
Re: (Score:1)
Most of them SAID they were giving bonuses but only a small handful actually have. Plenty of those bonuses that did get paid out were pre-negotiated and actually had jack schitt to do with the tax cuts.
what a FUD article (Score:2)
so 2.6% is less than 3% so things are terrible, even as unemployment falls? and illegals are kicked out?
yeah, this is whining
Misleading, tendentious (Score:2)
To say "wage growth is shrinking" with the implication that "something is wrong" following behind is so misleading one would have to ask what was the real purpose of releasing such a statement?
https://www.theatlas.com/chart... [theatlas.com]
Wage growth (such as it is/was) is flatlining ... which is still shit-tons better than it's been since 2008 where it's basically been falling in constant dollars.
pick me, pick me! (Score:2)
I know, I know; the solution is to open the borders even wider to people who will work for peanuts!
That will raise wages, because reasons!
Averages - careful of assumptions (Score:3)
Wages up 2.7%? Not that I can see. That is an *average*. The well-paid have rising salaries, the crap-paid wages are shrinking, the average being a bit up. You also have to factor in that the poorly-paid have rents that are rising way faster than their 8.50 up to 9.05 bucks an hour, just about everywhere now. Housing for the poor and merely cash-strapped ain't being built, and probably never will be.
Re: (Score:1)
I won't bother to tell you you're wrong, because you almost certainly won't just believe what I, or anyone else, tell you.
If you wanted to prove – to yourself, and to the rest of us – that you're not an ignorant hick and a rube in a fly over state (either that, or your name is Ivan, or Dmitri, or Sasha, and you're just here trolling), you could go look up wage statistics. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that you look back at least as far as 1980.
Because at least some of know that wage growth t
Re: Thank you nObama (Score:1)
You should start removing them like the roaches they are, then, and maybe us moderates would stop recoiling in horror at the GOP every other year.
Re: (Score:1)
Unfortunately, the Democrat's have their own set of roaches that also vote. It's an arms race of who can hold on to the most roaches.
Re: Thank you nObama (Score:2)
Just embrace that the world is now joeâ(TM)s apartment.
Re: (Score:2)
Logic in 2018.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares. Look into the summary and you'll see how fleeting this metric is. Obama never cracked 3% economic growth over all his terms.
I guess this is true if you leave out 2010 (3.8%), 2011 (3.7%), 2012 (4.1%), 2013 (3.1%), 2014 (4.4%), 2015 (4.9%), and 2017 (4.1%) [stlouisfed.org].