• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Stock Thread 2019

2legs2wheels said:
Agreed. That is for now. But without wage growth, there is not a lot of growth and even inflation (that reduces the interest burden).
Click to expand...

For sure, however the lowest unemployment in many decades is certainly a good thing, no matter how it is presented.
 
afm199 said:
For sure, however the lowest unemployment in many decades is certainly a good thing, no matter how it is presented.
Click to expand...

Certainly true, and better then alternative, but as you know devil is in the detail. Types of jobs matter also. As for wage growth. Read few articles by various economists, the gist of most seem to be "we don't know why wages not going up".
 
UDRider said:
Certainly true, and better then alternative, but as you know devil is in the detail. Types of jobs matter also. As for wage growth. Read few articles by various economists, the gist of most seem to be "we don't know why wages not going up".
Click to expand...

They are all over in our company(s) for almost everyone; skilled more than replaceable types. Are others not experiencing this as well?
 
Holeshot said:
They are all over in our company(s) for almost everyone; skilled more than replaceable types. Are others not experiencing this as well?
Click to expand...

Anecdotal evidence vs nation wide statistics.
 
https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Feriksherman%2Ffiles%2F2018%2F09%2Fmedian-weekly-earnings-st-louis-fed-graph.jpg
 
2009 would be too far back to take into account the crash/ resurgence.
 
Reli said:
OK, so how about 2014, it went from $330 to $352 in 2018......that's still only a 6.7% increase in 4 years......probably not enough to keep up with inflation.
Click to expand...

Not as much as we'd like, sure. However that 6.7% belies the quoted material in UDR's statement:

UDRider said:
As for wage growth. Read few articles by various economists, the gist of most seem to be "we don't know why wages not going up".
Click to expand...

Wages ARE going up, just not at a rate we'd like to see.
 
Other Perspective with more charts.

The starting point is, again, June 2009 at $334 per week, with the end measured in the second quarter of 2018 at $351. That is a 5.1% increase over nine years, or about 0.57% a year.
Click to expand...

Sure technically they are going up. In terms of real spending power? meh.

What Pew Research has to say on this subject.

A similar measure – the “usual weekly earnings” of employed, full-time wage and salary workers – tells much the same story, albeit over a shorter time period. In seasonally adjusted current dollars, median usual weekly earnings rose from $232 in the first quarter of 1979 (when the data series began) to $879 in the second quarter of this year, which might sound like a lot. But in real, inflation-adjusted terms, the median has barely budged over that period: That $232 in 1979 had the same purchasing power as $840 in today’s dollars.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I'm 100% with you on the inflation measure. Spending power has decreased, when proper inflation rates are used. This is why one of the most important measures of wage growth (or lack of growth) is in M1.
 
Reli said:
There's also the question of whose salaries are being used in that chart. If you made a chart showing the top 1% or 0.1% earners, I'll bet it will look very different.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree, but the sub debate here was on "wages" going up/ not going up. According to BARF, the top 1% aren't "wage" earners.
 
Well if we generalize his point there is a breakdown of whose wages went up by how much. Putting a side the glib 1% comment. Which is a whole other topic of discussion which revolves around compensation packages that involve stock options/rsus.
 
The earnings of the 1% have far, far outpaced the earnings/ increases of the proletariat. I think we all agree there. There are several reasons for that and those are always beneficial and worthwhile to debate, but we're also stepping into a wage gap discussion at that point.

My comment on our guys wages increasing (disproportionately to our annual normal increases) is due to demand for their skillsets in the market place. There's a shortage in our areas of operation; market segment and geographic location. We're in the Bay Area, Los Angeles area, Florida and PA.
 
There's plenty of 1 percenters on BARF, which is why I added the 0.1% to clarify that I'm not necessarily calling 1 percenters "wealthy" or "the problem". My point was simply that wealth inequality has been rising for a number of years now, which means that some group (1%, 0.1%, .001%, whatever) has been growing their income much faster than the rest of us. This affects politics and concentration of power/influence.
 
Reli said:
There's plenty of 1 percenters on BARF, which is why I added the 0.1% to clarify that I'm not necessarily calling 1 percenters "wealthy" or "the problem". My point was simply that wealth inequality has been rising for a number of years now, which means that some group (1%, 0.1%, .001%, whatever) has been growing their income much faster than the rest of us.
Click to expand...

+100
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top