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

Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

marketwatch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 160 posts

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#81

Post by walshemj »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #73
kmonsen wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We see this all the time in tech, cannot find people is usually cannot find people with the skills and experience we want for the price we are willing to pay. This will always be true if you offer less than the current market rate which startups seems to think they are entitled to.

I always hear people claiming tech is full of over-inflated salaries, then look at jobs in my area and see that people want a web-dev with 3-5 years of experience in specific frameworks and offer to pay about $82k/year. Yeah ok guys, that's pretty inflated, innit /s?

I have in the UK seen a job add in an agency for an experienced php developer at £27k next to it was for a senior "ground worker" for > £35k.

A ground worker is the PC term what's known in civil engineering as a "navvy"

Oh and the ground worker would get OT

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#82

Post by walshemj »

Retric wrote: post #35
jordanb wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One way to look at it is there is a ceiling on American wages imposed by globalization. Above that ceiling you're better off going overseas. But that ceiling is below the market-clearing price of labor in the us.

That does not work. If you can substitute foreign labor then there is no shortage. If you can't substitute foreign labor then it's irrelevant. You can't have a shortage of workers and falling wages. You can have uncompetitive US companies, but they are very profitable so the only thing left is irrational behavior.

If the workers are scared of a recession and losing their jobs you can.

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#83

Post by echevil »

ekidd wrote: post #8

I'm deeply skeptical of any explanation that claims that we have both a "shortage of labor" and "downward pressure on wages": > If men and women from the ages 25 to 54 took part in the labor market... [t]hat would be more fuel for the U.S. economy and a bigger source of workers for businesses crying out about a shortage of labor... > Trade with China flooded the U.S. with cheap imports, forced domestic firms to shift…

It's not an extraordinary claim at all as these two events co-exist: Too few people have skills that companies need; too many people having no skills or irrelevant skills are looking for jobs.

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#84

Post by walshemj »

tomohawk wrote: post #77
hycaria wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how do the immigrants manage to go by and live with the same wage?

They're committing document and identity fraud and dodging taxes. They're breaking housing laws by living multiple unrelated people (beyond legal capacity) per dwelling. We just had 9 illegal aliens evicted from a 2BR house not too far away. Good for them (probably a step up from 3rd world conditions), but bad if you want to maintain some quality of life.

And in even worse cases being held as indentured slaves - there have been a number of cases in the UK involving poor migrants from former WP countries in the EU, Id imagine the USA is no different.

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#85

Post by arebop »

scilro wrote: post #71

>Higher minimum wages are probably another cause. >After declining in inflation-adjusted terms from 1998 to 2007, minimum wages rose almost 11% in real terms between 2007 and 2016, Abraham and Kearney estimated. Firms may have outsourced jobs or spent more on automation to offset the higher costs of low-skilled labor. Is it just me, or is this a shockingly misleading paragraph? That minimum wages rose in real terms t…

"inflation-adjusted terms" and "real terms" are the same thing. The author was trying to avoid repetition but the only contrast intended here is between the earlier decline and later rise.

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#86

Post by UncleEntity »

jlmorton wrote: post #56
UncleEntity wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it would be advantageous for the US to erect trade barriers against Chinese exports, why would it not be advantageous for California to erect trade barriers against Mississippi, where average wages are dramatically lower, there are far fewer environmental regulations, etc. It would totally benefit California because they could do whatever they wanted and companies couldn't just up and move to Mississippi if thin…

> Not really sure what the point of this red herring is but the theory of protectionism applies equally well at all levels from the mom and pop grocery store opposed to a new Walmart to continent sized economic blocks. I agree that the effects would be largely the same. The point of the thought experiment is that protectionists never clamor for interstate trade barriers. Almost universally, protectionists accept and…

> Almost universally, protectionists accept and even marvel at the US single market and interstate free trade, but they somehow lose sight of the benefits when trade becomes international.

I would say it's because the states have a generally level playing field due to federal laws/regulations while foreign countries can do whatever they want to reduce prices. It's not like Ohio can make child labor legal or something like that.

Though I will admit most protectionists aren't really known for their ability to construct a rational economic argument to support their position.

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#87

Post by walshemj »

galieos_ghost wrote: post #11
baxtr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s your hypothesis that this is not happening elsewhere then? Let’s say in Germany. Free trade there as well...

Germany has been called out many times for boosting trade by manipulating the Euro. They also have stronger unions which plays a roll. They also don't have millions of illegal immigrants with no federal labor protection driving wages down internally. https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/05/26/trump-right...

well the workers in Germany don't seem to be getting much of the reward do they?

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#88

Post by tuckermi »

scilro wrote: post #71

>Higher minimum wages are probably another cause. >After declining in inflation-adjusted terms from 1998 to 2007, minimum wages rose almost 11% in real terms between 2007 and 2016, Abraham and Kearney estimated. Firms may have outsourced jobs or spent more on automation to offset the higher costs of low-skilled labor. Is it just me, or is this a shockingly misleading paragraph? That minimum wages rose in real terms t…

It seems confusingly worded, but "real terms" does typically mean that it is adjusted for inflation. Assuming that is the case, it is apples-to-apples even though it is oddly phrased.

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#89

Post by k_sh »

will_brown wrote: post #75

I can squeeze myself into that group due to long extents of unemployment in my prime years and I: - graduated college early - graduated law school early - was a judicial law school - co-developed and sold a patent pending business method for the automated calculation of fees in statutory litigation In my specific case, especially in law, one thing holds me back (essentially placing me on a do not hire blacklist) I ha…

It sounds like you're probably located in CA, have you looked into getting that possession taken off of your record, assuming the charge was in CA? The statewide legalization effort yielded[0] a provision that allows for review and possible expungement of marijuana-related charges.

[0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/convicted-of-a-marij...

Re: Why 3.5M Americans in their prime years aren’t working

#90

Post by user5994461 »

orangecat wrote: post #68
madaxe_again wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. One other factor which the study does not touch upon but I do wonder about - burnout - essentially "poor employment conditions". One thing which has substantially changed between '99 and now is employer expectation of availability. In '99, you may have worked 9-6, but when you left the office, you left the office. Sure, some tech folks, some traders, etc. may have had pagers back then - but now, the mobile ph…

the universal expectation is that you are available and ready to work Maybe among Silicon Valley startups. That has absolutely not been the case at any of my jobs at companies ranging from 5 to tens of thousands of employees.

It's the same in every company. Things need to run 24/7 and there are never enough people to take care of it.

There will always be some suckers who are pushed to work overnight and week end.

Post reply on HN