Looks like trickle down works after all

[DJL 232]

12 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Trickle down STILL working.

Jobs up, wages up, unemployment down and the record breaking economic expansion continues.

 

THANKS OBAMA!

[brenthutch 384]

Obama leveled out at five percent, Trump has it down to 3.5, defying all conventional wisdom of what constitutes full employment.  Not to mention real wage growth, during the Obama administration it was close to zero.  Under Trump? >3%.  In short, more jobs, more money, less taxes.

Edited December 6, 2019 by brenthutch

[DJL 232]

58 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Obama leveled out at five percent, Trump has it down to 3.5, defying all conventional wisdom of what constitutes full employment.  Not to mention real wage growth, during the Obama administration it was close to zero.  Under Trump? >3%.  In short, more jobs, more money, less taxes.

You're talking about that one little part in 2016?  That's ignoring most of the graph.  

As for wage growth again, steady through Obama to Trump.  My joke aside, a President has little to do with the economy during their own Presidency.

 

As for hourly earnings, pretty flat still:

Real wage growth taking inflation into account is pretty bad:

 

1% isn't terrible and we are starting to see the effects of a labor shortage with increased pay but there are simply too many people and we're advancing automation more than ever.  

Edited December 6, 2019 by DJL

[brenthutch 384]

On 12/6/2019 at 3:32 PM, DJL said:

we are starting to see the effects of a labor shortage with increased pay but there are simply too many people and we're advancing automation more than ever.  

How do you reconcile "labor shortage" with "too many people"?  

[kallend 1,635]

On 12/6/2019 at 1:35 PM, brenthutch said:

Obama leveled out at five percent, Trump has it down to 3.5, defying all conventional wisdom of what constitutes full employment.  Not to mention real wage growth, during the Obama administration it was close to zero.  Under Trump? >3%.  In short, more jobs, more money, less taxes.

Your inability to misinterpret data in the most obvious way  never fails to amaze me.

[brenthutch 384]

3 hours ago, kallend said:

Your inability to misinterpret data in the most obvious way  never fails to amaze me.

Since you lack a background in economics or business I will be patient with you.  What economists consider "full employment", is around 5%.   It is unremarkable that unemployment dropped from 10% to 5% under Obama, that is just normal business cycle stuff.  What is remarkable is the move from 5% down to 3.5%, with low inflation. It has economists everywhere scratching their heads, and is redefining what is considered full employment.

[richravizza 25]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Your inability to misinterpret data in the most obvious way  never fails to amaze me.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/04/50-years-of-us-wages-in-one-chart/

 

As the following chart shows, today’s wages in the United States are at a historically high level with average hourly earnings in March 2019 amounting to $23.24 in 2019 dollars. Coincidentally that matches the longtime peak of March 1974, when hourly wages adjusted to 2019 dollars amounted to exactly the same sum.

 

Try "US median incomes" its a simple search 

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=eyHtXYqbLIzYsQXwlrfgAw&q=median+income+us&oq=median+income&gs_l=psy-ab.1.2.0l10.6096.11907..15274...0.0..0.109.1293.12j2......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131.IoO9UITrQUk

Consumer confidence, 2016 to present, also interesting.

 Something we can Agree on.

The official unemployment rate, or  full employment rate is a misnomer in many ways.... 

Unfortunately it always discounts folks that have give up, discouraged and broken in failure.These folks are represented along with some  20 other categories in the Labor force participation rate. "Persons not in labor force who want a job".

As that line goes down,"its a good thing" for those less fortunate that us.Hope change and opportunity now possible.

[JoeWeber 2,316]

42 minutes ago, richravizza said:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/04/50-years-of-us-wages-in-one-chart/

 

As the following chart shows, today’s wages in the United States are at a historically high level with average hourly earnings in March 2019 amounting to $23.24 in 2019 dollars. Coincidentally that matches the longtime peak of March 1974, when hourly wages adjusted to 2019 dollars amounted to exactly the same sum.

 

Try "US median incomes" its a simple search 

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=eyHtXYqbLIzYsQXwlrfgAw&q=median+income+us&oq=median+income&gs_l=psy-ab.1.2.0l10.6096.11907..15274...0.0..0.109.1293.12j2......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131.IoO9UITrQUk

Consumer confidence, 2016 to present, also interesting.

 Something we can Agree on.

The official unemployment rate, or  full employment rate is a misnomer in many ways.... 

Unfortunately it always discounts folks that have give up, discouraged and broken in failure.These folks are represented along with some  20 other categories in the Labor force participation rate. "Persons not in labor force who want a job".

As that line goes down,"its a good thing" for those less fortunate that us.Hope change and opportunity now possible.

That's outstanding news for everyone. I'm curious, how many hourly employee's at Skydive Happy Valley made $23.24 an hour on average this year? I'd argue that averaging them in with your winnings, your gig economy piece workers or other better paid workers elsewhere isn't valid. If the answer is none, that's cool, and not your problem. It'll trickle down to them sometime from somewhere, right? Simple economics and business.

[kallend 1,635]

4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Since you lack a background in economics or business I will be patient with you.  What economists consider "full employment", is around 5%.   It is unremarkable that unemployment dropped from 10% to 5% under Obama, that is just normal business cycle stuff.  What is remarkable is the move from 5% down to 3.5%, with low inflation. It has economists everywhere scratching their heads, and is redefining what is considered full employment.

QED.

PS: My background is in data analysis in a real science.

[brenthutch 384]

14 minutes ago, kallend said:

QED.

PS: My background is in data analysis in a real science.

You won't get any argument from me.  It used to piss off my professors when I said economics had more in common with psychology than it did with math.  That said, a 3.5% unemployment rate for the U.S. is unprecedented in the modern era.  The growth in manufacturing jobs is particularly impressive even though a chunk of that was from the end of the GM strike.

[normiss 622]

Statistical data is sometimes used much like a drunk uses a lamp post.

More for support than illumination.

[brenthutch 384]

48 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

 

48 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I'm curious, how many hourly employee's at Skydive Happy Valley made $23.24 an hour on average this year? 

 

None, our hourly employees (pilots) make $30 an hour. 

[normiss 622]

28 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

None, our hourly employees (pilots) make $30 an hour. 

 

29 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

None, our hourly employees (pilots) make $30 an hour. 

"Median" is the key word here.

[JoeWeber 2,316]

36 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

None, our hourly employees (pilots) make $30 an hour. 

Now that's industry odd. So is that an actual hourly wage where they are scheduled for a certain number of hours per day or week and get $30 per hour for their scheduled shift, fly or not? Or is that $15. per load in a 182?

[gowlerk 1,916]

45 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Now that's industry odd. So is that an actual hourly wage where they are scheduled for a certain number of hours per day or week and get $30 per hour for their scheduled shift, fly or not? Or is that $15. per load in a 182?

Joe, it's so inconvenient for people when you spot obvious BS and call it out. Maybe he pays $30 per log hour. Which of course would normally be less than minimum wage in real hours spent at the place of employment.

Edited December 8, 2019 by gowlerk

[JoeWeber 2,316]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Joe, it's so inconvenient for people when you spot obvious BS and call it out. Maybe he pays $30 per log hour. Which of course would normally be less than minimum wage in real hours spent at the place of employment.

With your permission, like I actually give a fuck, I'm giving you a rep point for what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did to brighten my day at the NATO Summit.

[gowlerk 1,916]

35 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

With your permission, like I actually give a fuck, I'm giving you a rep point for what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did to brighten my day at the NATO Summit.

Rep points are getting to be like candy. Have one back! It's a shame we can't easily get together for a drink. Yourself, Brent, and I!

[brenthutch 384]

2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Now that's industry odd. So is that an actual hourly wage where they are scheduled for a certain number of hours per day or week and get $30 per hour for their scheduled shift, fly or not? Or is that $15. per load in a 182?

It's $30 an hour with a two hour guarantee, just for showing up, rain or shine.  We have to contend with this pesky little thing called economics.  There is a glider operation we have to compete with, less than an hour away.

[brenthutch 384]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Rep points are getting to be like candy. Have one back! It's a shame we can't easily get together for a drink. Yourself, Brent, and I!

That would be fun, I'll buy.

[JoeWeber 2,316]

16 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

It's $30 an hour with a two hour guarantee, just for showing up, rain or shine.  We have to contend with this pesky little thing called economics.  There is a glider operation we have to compete with, less than an hour away.

That's called a $60 show up fee, yo. And fucking right you'll buy. If nothing else maybe you can drink.

[DJL 232]

On 12/7/2019 at 8:43 PM, brenthutch said:

How do you reconcile "labor shortage" with "too many people"?  

"1% isn't terrible and we are starting to see the effects of a labor shortage with increased pay but there are simply too many people and we're advancing automation more than ever.  "

Exactly how I quoted myself.  We're in a good job market and we're at as low of a rate of unemployment as we'll likely see but we've still not creating a situation in which salary increases.  There are many people willing to take low paying jobs and not complain about it.

[JoeWeber 2,316]

26 minutes ago, DJL said:

"1% isn't terrible and we are starting to see the effects of a labor shortage with increased pay but there are simply too many people and we're advancing automation more than ever.  "

Exactly how I quoted myself.  We're in a good job market and we're at as low of a rate of unemployment as we'll likely see but we've still not creating a situation in which salary increases.  There are many people willing to take low paying jobs and not complain about it.

 

26 minutes ago, DJL said:

There are many people willing to take low paying jobs and not complain about it.

You mean like at Skydive Happy Valley?

[brenthutch 384]

 The tight labor market is giving the worker more leverage than at anytime in the last 50 years.  Employers are scrambling to attract and retain talent. Real wages are up, there are more jobs available than workers to fill them.  If some one wants a better paying job they can just go out and get one. 

[DJL 232]

1 minute ago, JoeWeber said:

You mean like at Skydive Happy Valley?

Exactly.  I hear Brent makes his employees shine the chrome on his Bentley during weather holds.

[brenthutch 384]

2 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

 

You mean like at Skydive Happy Valley?

Wow!  What up with the hate?  Looks like I am living, rent free, in your brain.