Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 149 posts

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#111

Post by Arizhel »

usmeteora wrote: post #91
Arizhel wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the employers better get busy raising salaries now, right? This situation has been created by the employers. They've held salaries down, they've refused to give raises at all (which is why everyone changes jobs every few years, so they can get back to "market rate" instead of their salary being stuck at whatever they were hired at + minuscule cost-of-living raises), and they've had massive layoffs constantly. It…

I agree with you despite the level of skill its still requires alot of continual learning and mobility. However, it takes alot longer to become a doctor than a software dev, as in more required schooling. Here are a few other things to consider about comparing software to doctor/medicine industry 1. The rate of change of which human biology changes is alot smaller than the rate of which technology changes, and this i…

I'm just pointing out that it's disingenuous for employers to whine about a lack of employees, while simultaneously not giving them proper raises (they have the money, because they offer it to new hires) and not providing any kind of job security. They alone have made the profession unattractive to many, especially women.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#112

Post by eli_gottlieb »

usmeteora wrote: post #79
beagle3 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, "make themselves qualified" to be good electrical engineers or even software engineers takes on the order of 10-15 years. If tomorrow every electrical engineer salary went 10 times higher, supply would still take 10 years to improve.

Electrical Engineer true. Software Dev though? I just googledo nline 30 seconds ago and theres free courses titled "Free online course to learn Tensorflow" "same for Elastic Search" "intro to VR" "Intro to Python" "App dev" etc...these are all free and accessible to the same people who work at coffee shops and browse twitter and facebook..... So would it take 10 years for these people to learn the skills? I think the…

A second anecdata point. I got laid-off from a job in embedded firmware in January. I just started a new gig this week as a web developer. Prior to that, almost every single position I interviewed for turned me down. I asked for feedback. They invariably said, "Not enough experience with our area." When this was web-dev, where I have little to no experience, this was understandable -- it was also 90% of the available jobs. When this was embedded firmware, it just boggled me.

Almost two years' experience in embedded firmware is not enough qualification to write embedded firmware? Because I wrote bare-metal firmware, and you want someone who's used your dev-board or your embedded Linux before? Come on.

Employers are currently very exacting.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#113

Post by malandrew »

usmeteora wrote: post #75
ptr_void wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think jazzyk was hinting that - with enough pay, people will do what they can to make themselves qualified. There's also the option of choosing the best people they get and start training them internally to make them qualified.

I get what youre saying logicially and in general I don't disagree with you, but I want to pose a new way of thinking about this that may be unique to times previous and see what people think, because its a forming idea in my head, and I'm not sure its somethign I've settled on yet in general With software engineering specifically, given the amount of people who have access to the internet, lets say like unemployed y…

Great comment. I would speculate that it's cognitive style that predicts that.

If you take the neurotypical to autistic spectrum, someone on the NT side will find that work that takes advantages of the NT cognitive style adds to their quality of life, and work that doesn't detracts from it. The same goes for people further on the aspie/autistic side.

Someone with an NT cognitive style might love working in finance or politics or sales but hate working in STEM. The opposite it true for those with an aspie/autistic style.

The last few decades of not the last century since the industrial revolution has seen the rise of well/paying in-demand jobs that appeal those with a cognitive style more on the aspie/autist end of the spectrum. I think a lot of those on the NT end of the spectrum who have typically been in a position of earning power for most of human history are starting to resent the fact that systems are being engineered that automate and devalue skills That those with an NT cognitive style excel at.

It also doesn't help that that the supply of thosewith an NT cognitive style greatly outnumber those with a more aspie/autistic style for reasons of millennia of sexual selection for NT traits.

I think it's quite natural to resent high earners doing a job that you either cannot do or would not enjoy doing.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#114

Post by IanDrake »

maxerickson wrote: post #106
IanDrake wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but they are a good example because they are usually not accustom to wealth and thus more likely to believe (like the OP) that wealthy people just sit on a pile of cash and buy exotic sports cars while doing hookers and blow 24/7. You don't often hear wealthy people complain about other wealthy people because they know how hard it is to stay wealthy. It is a skill to make money with money.

You switched to a statistical argument ( However, most people who didn't earn their money don't. ), you need statistical evidence, not examples.

"70 percent of people who come into sudden money are broke within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education."

Now do we get to argue over the source?

Does it somehow not fit your world view that managing wealth is real work?

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#115

Post by logfromblammo »

s_kilk wrote: post #68
spiralpolitik wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ruling class is much greedier than they were in the 90s.

They also have concrete proof (by way of the reaction to the 2008 crisis) that they have essentially unlimited license to be as greedy as they like, and the public will just take it.

A modern Robespierre might know that his Thermidor is coming, but if you push him far enough, he might grow to believe that price is a bargain.

Were I in the ownership class, I wouldn't exactly try to temper my avarice in absolute terms, but I would at least try to remain less conspicuously wealthy than my peers. As they say, you don't need to outrun the tiger, if you can outrun your friend.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#116

Post by jazzyk »

IanDrake wrote: post #84
maxerickson wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could make $300,000-$400,000 per year putting that in CDs. In the top 1 or 2% of households by income for pretty much doing nothing. Maybe not a literally obscene income though.

I must not have made my point well. Sure, you could do that and maybe you would. However, most people who didn't earn their money don't. Most of those same people think the rich "do nothing" and make money. It's this kind of ignorance that causes bullshit class warfare where it doesn't exist.

A lot (not all) of rich people who inherited money actually do nothing, they have money people managing their wealth (for a good cut of the profits).

And making money on your capital in a perma-bull stock market (casino?), engineered by the Fed is not that complicated.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#117

Post by aninhumer »

IanDrake wrote: post #95
aninhumer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, one could put it in an S&P index fund and by all historical trends, they would make an average of 2 million per year (8%) without doing anything. That is an obscene amount of money. Or if you're more conservative, you could put it in bonds and still be making many times the average salary, still without doing anything. (And lottery participants are highly likely to be less well informed about managing money, sin…

You're not factoring in market timing and drawdowns. Average is great if you're living 10 lives at 10 different moments in history, but we only get one. Put 25 million in the S&P 500 (qqq) in March of 2000 and draw 2 million a year on it. You are out of money inside of 4 years. There is no 100% safe place to stick that much money and live off of it. The world is too dynamic and it takes real skill and work to make mo…

As far as I can see, QQQ seems to perform a fair bit worse than the S&P 500 itself? Maybe it's an unfair metric, or maybe it's just a fair commentary about the risks of index funds.

But in any case, I said you'd make that much on average, not that you could withdraw that much every year. In reality, you would draw down a smaller fraction of that (but still an immense salary for no work). And since your capital would be growing on average, you could increase your drawdown over time accordingly.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#118

Post by abakker »

losteric wrote: post #108
jazzyk wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They can't get enough qualified people... ...for the price they are offering. There, fixed it for ya :-)

Yep, that's what a labor shortage looks like :) Labor can ask for a price that's higher than the ROI of their labor for many businesses. In comparison, there's an excess supply of unskilled labor so businesses can purchase unskilled labor for minimum wage. Those people survive but do not profit from their time investment, and cannot invest in acquiring skills (aka poverty trap). The issue is that automation drives ef…

Excellent answer. Very much agree with the part about automation.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#119

Post by maxerickson »

IanDrake wrote: post #114
maxerickson wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You switched to a statistical argument ( However, most people who didn't earn their money don't. ), you need statistical evidence, not examples.

"70 percent of people who come into sudden money are broke within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education." Now do we get to argue over the source? Does it somehow not fit your world view that managing wealth is real work?

It takes discipline to not just piss away a million dollars (the sorts of windfalls that claim includes), it doesn't take enormous effort to set it up in low risk assets that yield income.

As a cousin comment points out, it is even possible to buy management services.

Re: Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising?

#120

Post by [deleted] »

IanDrake wrote: post #114
maxerickson wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You switched to a statistical argument ( However, most people who didn't earn their money don't. ), you need statistical evidence, not examples.

"70 percent of people who come into sudden money are broke within a few years, according to the National Endowment for Financial Education." Now do we get to argue over the source? Does it somehow not fit your world view that managing wealth is real work?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN