WHAT IS A DECENT AVERAGE SALARY IN THE US?

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by LafayetteBis, Jan 30, 2020.

  1. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The posting of dictionary quotes was for your benefit, not mine. Let me know when a 'right winger' gets involved in this conversation.

    When you actually apply labor and supply/demand, wages and labor supply, here in the US, you may actually have a understanding that what maybe applicable under the economic pretensions of the UK existing government, and what is applicable in the US under the existing government are not the same thing.

    Until then, slainte!
     
  2. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To use dictionary quotes and then get it so drastically wrong was helpful. I've already thanked you for that.

    We only prove that you could brush up on your reading skills. Britain adopts neoliberal practices, with continued Thatcherism which has decimated labour rights. As I said, the labour market flexibility has created a low wage, low productivity outcome (demonstrating endogeneity in human capital). Its also characterised by high use of zero hour contracts, illustrating the consequences of employer labour market power.

    For all your arrogance, your position I'm afraid is simply based on knowledge deficiency over the real world characteristics of supply and demand.
     
  3. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We live in one of the least expensive areas of the country. Middle class begins at about $52K/year around here. For $102K/year, you can live as well here as you could on twice that much along the coasts. The down side to living in a low cash flow area, where incomes and out goes are not as inflated, is that it is harder to pay off debt. Most of the young people can't pay off their student loans at our local income rates. They benefit greatly from economies with inflated incomes/costs.
     
    Idahojunebug77 likes this.
  4. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A nonsensical comment! If we wanted to talk loans, we'd perhaps refer to Chomsky and analysis into how debt has ensured greater compliance. "Decent wage" becomes endogenous and naturally part of the 'rent' profiteering required by an establishment desperate to maintain the wage-productivity distinction.
     
  5. Quadhole

    Quadhole Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2016
    Messages:
    1,702
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Decent wage would be a viable living wage for one person with avg. lifestyle and needs, plus a few wants that can be paid for. A healthcare system that works for them allowing to afford all healthcare if needed.
    S000: $90,000.00 Gets you what you need and want. Basically the same as the average income up to 1984 before the corru[tion took over the deregulation's and tax reform for the scum.
     
    FreshAir likes this.
  6. Texan

    Texan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    Messages:
    9,126
    Likes Received:
    4,696
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    ....and it will be ordered at an automated kiosk and made by machines. Those $7.15/hr workers will be completely on welfare and our teens won't be able to get part time work. You'll pay that extra $7.85/hr to the welfare rolls and begin supporting another generation of slackers. Congratulations.
     
  7. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Hasn't happened yet, and Macdonald's has made a tremendous effort to expand by employing "normal production practices" for a hamburger-shop. It would be a fool to make it all automated. And, already, it has made the "front-office" automated enough divorcing it completely with the "back-office" production part. It needs that human touch for humans to keep dropping in.

    Besides, there's plenty of competition that pops hamburgers out of a machine. They don't have the business-level that Mcdonalds has and THAT is what matters most (to stock-market pricing) ... !
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2020
  8. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The question you should be asking is: why is the US so reliant on working poverty labour, unlike many other developed countries?
     
  9. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,608
    Likes Received:
    11,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, that is really hard to say, it depends what part of the country you're in, and what you consider to be a decent standard of living.

    The conventional wisdom is that you can afford a home price 4 to 5 times your annual income.
    Probably a 'typical' middle class home will cost between 300,000 to 700,000 depending where in the country you are.
    That would correlate to a salary of 60,000 to 140,000. Probably we are talking combined household income.

    Assuming one of the parents is working part-time, and perhaps full-time at times, they might earn about 35,000 so that means the other primary earner might have to earn 105,000 per year to be considered solidly middle class. Perhaps as low as 40,000 a year in the very lowest cost of living areas (but those areas can be tough to find a 40,000 a year job in).

    One also has to draw a distinction between 'lower middle class' and more 'solid middle class'. A salary of 35,000 might be lower middle class, and 55,000 might be more into solid middle class territory.

    Some parts of the country have "housing poverty", where people may earn decent wages but the price of housing is so expensive that people are "housing poor". When it comes to housing they live like a poor person, or have to spend so much money for housing, their effective income is much lower than it otherwise would be. Many of these areas have seen a high proportion of immigrants from foreign countries.
     
  10. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That is a good question for discussion, because of the wide range of salaries across the length and breadth of the US.

    This discussion here from Quora is indicative of an answer: What is considered a good salary in the US?

    What can be seen is that upper-income salaries can go from $225K/year in Mississippi to $700K in Connecticut.

    Also from that interesting discussion, this chart:
    [​IMG]

    Upper-income salaries are being earned by a tiny-section of the American public. It is the above chart that better shows the distribution of salaries are across the entire earnings-spectrum ...

    PS: Note also that the above chart dates to 2012, when the US was still groping along in the Great Recession. So, yes, whilst some Americans in Connecticut were taking trains to splendidly paying jobs in NYC (above $150K annually), a great many other Yanks were bystanding on the unemployed-sidelines!
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2020
    Jkca1 likes this.
  11. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's interesting.

    What makes you think that the US and the UK are different given the existing governments on both sides of the pond?

    Both heads of government are professional jerks. Both were elected as an expression of frustration (at extended economic failure).

    Frustration never selects the right-solution. It is based upon sentimental urges and is devoid of thoughtful good-sense. And, believe me, both the Brits and the Yanks were really "pissed-off" at the economic-situation when they voted the two present jerks into the Executive Office ...
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2020
  12. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    WHERE ARE THE LADIES?

    Which brings up yet another matter of some consequence: Why (still) are most countries run by males? No women around as sufficiently good political candidates?

    Why is not Warren the top-candidate to piss-off Donald Dork in the upcoming election?

    The male dominance of Country Executive position needs to stop in a number of developed countries (including the US). Merkel has been a competent person to head the German government. And another German lady is newly head of the European Commission. (That does not mean the European Government, because the EU parliament sits separately in Strasbourg. But the EU does not elect a Head of EU-government because the post does not exist. The countries were supposedly worried about losing their "independence".)

    We need more similarly competent women to run matters in both the US and EU. They think/act Very Differently from the males of the same species and they are most certainly not less intelligent*. (And are significantly less belligerent.)

    They should be given there chance at the helm ...

    *The matter of male/female comparative intelligence remains for debate, since scientifically no clear evidence is available. See here. Nonetheless, in terms of actual female governance there are only two major historical examples. Both come from the UK - the first being Thatcher and the second being more recent (T. May).
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2020
  13. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More anti-immigration garbage! Housing poverty reflects market failure (from rent seeking to pricing bubbles). Feck all to do with immigrants.
     
  14. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The median salary per worker is around $34K
    The median income per household is around $55K.

    Wages in the private sector are determined by the formula that enables any business to satisfy demand and earn profits. Part of this formula is the cost of labor. Whatever the business model might be, it is required that expenses are less than income to provide adequate profits. Revenue is determined by demand which is greatly effected by the product pricing. The bottom line is no matter what the cost of labor might be, it is incumbent that consumers will pay a price that allows enough income to provide profits. So...the real question is are consumers willing to universally pay higher prices in order to allow greater business expenses which are caused by increasing worker wages? Answer; not much.

    The other part of this labor cost is the competitiveness between US business and their competitors around the world? If all businesses around the world increased wages the same amounts, no issue. But if US companies increase labor rates, and increase expenses, which also increase consumer pricing, how will US companies compete with other businesses around the world who can have lower labor rates? Answer; they can't.

    In Seattle, perhaps around 1987, things were pretty normal, housing was cheap, etc. Then along came a thing called Microsoft, which is one of the greatest things to happen, but there were consequential changes that took place. First, high tech employees required more and different education from the previous post WWII blue-collar workers. Those who achieved this found great jobs with great pay and bonuses. They became consumers on steroids! Suddenly due to demand houses that sold for $100K were $400K, then $1 million and more. Meanwhile Microsoft grows and grows and creates more and more consumers on steroids. In parallel with this wonderful success story, the other half of society were stuck in lower educated and lower paid jobs and all of them feeling the pinch of horrific inflation. When this happens everything is more expensive! Suddenly honest and hard working people find they cannot afford to live, and over time, this gets worse and worse. This same scenario has played out in every major city across the nation in myriad industries. So...my question is can we ever pay lower educated and lower skilled workers enough for them to live in any of the high employment centers of the US? Answer; I don't think so.

    I think the long term answer is that society needs to create truly affordable housing, truly efficient and affordable public transit, universal health care system, free internet access, and whatever else that will be a hedge against constant inflation...
     
  15. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And for me the basis of a decent economic-society is the manner in which all its individuals are treated both equally and fairly. Meaning there should exist no dominance of any particular group (financial or religious), and representation within a common governance be not only free but above all impartial.

    Which I believe is attainable only when the laws that regulate the behaviour of citizens is a both fair and unbiased democracy ...
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2020
  16. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well...when most of an 'economic society' is the private sector, there is little government can do. Government can create a few laws but those are already in place today. Humans cannot be packaged in a single definition since every human has different potential and different contributions, etc. The US IMO is the best place on Earth because we recognize individuality and everyone has the opportunity to achieve their potential. One downside of this is some people will be perceived to rise while others will be perceived to remain lower, when in fact the only thing that has meaning is what the individual does. Things are different today, and will be different tomorrow, and it is incumbent upon all people to modify their lives as necessary in order to not to be left wanting. Fifty years ago with a lower population these problems were not a big issue, but today, as I mentioned in my previous comments, millions of Americans HAVE NOT modified their lives and today are left wanting. And because of the large numbers today it is now a huge burden on society. IMO since the burden is on 'society', it is societies issue to deal with...not the private sector...
     
  17. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,608
    Likes Received:
    11,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The issue is, the population of the country grew. A disproportionate number of these people moved to major big cities, rather than desolate uninhabited places.
    The common worker can no longer afford to live in the trendy big city areas.

    This doesn't bode well for progressives and liberals who don't want to leave their big city areas.
    (It's no coincidence the progressive landscape in the country has been ironically turning more bourgeoisie)
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2020
  18. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The population exacerbates this issue but is not the cause. Generally speaking, what's the difference between a worker earning $15/hour and one earning $100K/year...education and work skills. Every person who begins a work search knows exactly what types of jobs they can seek and it's primarily based on education and work skills. The only way to change this is for more people to obtain higher levels of education and high-demand work skills. Sadly, in our major employment centers, the larger cities, even workers earning $100K cannot afford to live in those areas. Affordability is not just a problem for lower paid workers...it is a problem across the nation where inflation has run rampant. There is no possible way to tweak and/or adjust wages to solve this issue. Which is precisely why I see the only solution is 'society' must provide an affordable infrastructure where average people can work and play...
     
  19. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I shed a little tear on that.
    Must be tough deriving your income from government management of markets, and direction of government contracts to favored entities, collecting your rent for little productivity in return.
     
  20. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That is why the average cost of American housing has skyrocketed.

    And, believe me, the opposite CAN&WILL HAPPEN due to the present bloat in unemployment resulting from COVID-19.

    And Donald Dork knows he can't get reelected in even a minor recession!

    Let's wait-'n- see ... !
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
  21. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,608
    Likes Received:
    11,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tell me, why does every discussion about the economy have to be about who the president is?

    Can't we have a discussion about the economy that isn't in any way about the president?
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
  22. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The biggest expense people pay is housing. Problem is that housing can be quite expensive in big cities. But that is because so many want to live there. If we put a cap on housing prices, then there would be a really bad housing shortage. If we gave people more money to pay for housing, then housing demand will go up, and so will prices. So maybe if someone wants to live in an expensive place like California, instead of a cheaper place like Texas, taxpayers shouldn't subsidize that choice.

    Another big expense is taxes. My life would sure be a lot more affordable if I didn't have to pay 25% of my income in taxes. Cutting my taxes will make my life more affordable. Just saying.

    Healthcare is a big nasty one. I think we need to move to a universal healthcare system that is more cost-effective. But another thing people can do is diet and exersize properly so they don't need to use healthcare services as much. Also lay off the booze and smokes. A big expense is dental world, but if people took care of their teeth properly, it would be a lot cheaper. Yearly checkups are another good idea for preventative care.

    Education is a huge expense. But I see a lot of waste. So many classes I took had so little to do with what I eventually am doing. And I hear about all these liberal arts majors that don't get you good jobs. But yet I can go onto udemy and learn code for super cheap. I really believe that education can become very flexible and you can take an online class on a website and get a certificate.

    Rather than throwing money at people, that will just raise prices, lets encourage smart choices that makes our dollars go further.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,608
    Likes Received:
    11,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you talking about building infrastructure in new areas? Basically building desirable city areas in places where a city did not used to exist?
     
  24. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    WELLNESS, WHAT IS IT?

    More easily said than done.

    Infrastructure means government policy. And for as long as a country has ineffective Healthcare and Post-secondary Education, it cannot "get to where it should be". In this New-Age of ours, where we have long-since exited from the Industrial Age that has left for South-east Asia and entered the Information Age - which is how we are communicating today.

    There is always a balance between what Market Forces decide and what the economy supposedly needs and also when a more Independent Eyes see as a necessity. We, in the US, are too hog-tied to the former. The market is "everything", or so we think. It is all over the TV - and we Yanks watch more TV than any other developed country on earth.

    The market aint-everything. It is just one component of a highly complex socioeconomic-system where there exists a multiplicity of factors that are key to our existence and moreover our wellness.

    Namely both economic and social in nature whereas BOTH must be taken into consideration. Expect nothing from a Donald Dork who thinks "social" means a Church Social on Sundays where we Yanks eat one helluva-lotta food. And is why as a nation we are clearly OVERWEIGHT.

    It means the Essential Values (that we erect and seek to maintain), which are near and dear to our hearts. But for as long as we chose whatever-money-can-buy as prime-values, they will be that which we shoppers are willing-to-pay.

    And there are all sorts of "devices" - both physical and imagined - available to assure that our decisions are in-line with what businesses want to provide ...

    PS: For instance, a mother's love is not something you can buy at the supermarket.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
  25. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    For one thing, he is very "current" at the moment. He's just committed one helluva mistake that is going to cost him badly at the next election.

    And elections determine national policy. Had Hillary been allowed to enjoy her popular-vote win it is entirely possible our country would already be very different. (Though how she would have avoided Covid-19 is impossible to answer! Methinks she would have reacted much sooner, such that the present inevitability of a great-many more deaths were avoided.)

    Not likely, simply because at the moment it is what Executive Economic Policy determines our first-concerns. Like employment, that is near-and-dear to our hearts because we Yanks are Prime-Consumers. In fact, there is nothing more important to our American lifestyles than "Consumption". (With a capital "C".)

    Not all countries are like that, but one must live elsewhere than the US to appreciate that notion.

    Besides, I have on this forum been banging-the-drums for two Prime Necessities of which America is presently devoid - and I have been doing so a long, long time. They are National Healthcare and Free Post-secondary Education. (Have you got more to add as "prime necessities"? Go for it!)

    Do tell me how I am wrong to make those considerations "prime" ... !

    PS: I have always thought that American doctors supported Republican policies. Well, that may be changing. Let's hope so - but see an explanation here from WSJ:
    Doctors, Once GOP Stalwarts, Now More Likely to Be Democrats
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020

Share This Page