Half of America Shut off from Economic Growth (1 Viewer)

[AAABatteries]

What I'm talking about is income inequality, and more specifically whether that is the cause of the problems for the poor. Yes, I read the article, and I agree with a lot of it, but again, I'm focused on the driver- the increase in inequality is caused by a drastic rise in automation, globalization, etc., not the other way around.

I think income inequality in and of itself is mostly a red herring- it's a consideration, but IMO we'd be far better served focusing on absolute livelihoods instead of relative ones, even though that isn't as politically convenient.

I think we are talking past each other and mostly agreeing.  It sounds like we have different topics/ideas:

1. The plight of the low income earners.  How they got there - education, poor choices, lost the gene lottery (born poor or in some cases quite frankly, dumb), laziness.  Some are arguing work harder and make the most of your situation.  I agree with that sentiment, but I also acknowledge that doesn't work for everyone or even a large percentage of people.  There's lots of people who work hard and get nowhere.  This is where I pointed out that things like min wage increases, healthcare reform, and other items can help these folks.  The thing is people want to point to people to individual examples of people bettering themselves to say, "see, anybody can do it" - this ignores that most don't and we need to up what we consider to be an acceptable standard of living for our poor.

2. Income inequality.  This is more what is in that article - the movement of wealth continues to move from the bottom and middle to the very top.  This, I think, is unsustainable and contributes to underiable outcomes.  Discussing causes like automation was part of what I was discussing.  I think other causes is because organizations have kept more of the profits.

3.  The uber rich having too much power in our society - being too involved in our politics for personal or organizational gains

 

[kutta]

I'm definitely not rich but my annual income is well above the national average.   Don't work very hard at all.

Dammit! I've been doing it wrong for quite awhile.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Saw something recently that suggested income is mostly hereditary  Plenty of exceptions, but by in large one's income can largely be predicted by their parents.  If your dad's a doctor or a partner in a law firm, you're in luck.  You'll work hard, and eventually make millions working hard.  If your Dad didn't finish HS and works shifts at 2 jobs to make ends meet, you'll work hard and likely barely manage to live above the poverty line.  

Anyone who says hard work doesn't matter is delusional.  And anyone who doesn't admit that luck is a far bigger factor is also delusional.  

 

[Politician Spock]

Interesting story. 

I think we all agree that the $10-$15 an hour guy is never going to "make it," even with yearly raises and hard work. And it sounds like you agree that you would not have had the success you had in IT without hard work. 

And I agree with the bolded. We probably disagree on the percentage of folks with the talents and skills necessary, but I do agree that not everyone is going to be super successful even if they work as hard as possible. 

The $10-$15 an hour range is where a ton of the workforce is. I know the mean hourly wage is around $25 and hour, but my understanding is that median hourly wage is around $17. That means half the workforce makes less than $17 an hour and half makes more than $17 an hour. That's a lot of people who are never going to "make it". Isn't that exactly what the article in the OP is saying?

 

[tommyGunZ]

I'm definitely not rich but my annual income is well above the national average.   Don't work very hard at all.

I'm in that boat as well.  Several of the guys I played HS hoops with work twice as hard as I do, and make far less.  

 

[AAABatteries]

Cost of living increases are a fundamental flaw of our pay system. People feel entitled to them, regardless of personal performance and regardless of how the company performed.

Take the lifelong warehouse worker. How often are they truly more valuable in year 30 than the guy in year 2? I bet their pay is remarkably different which slants that scale even further. 

I think COL and merit increases should be two separate things.  Raises in general obviously need to be somewhat tied to performance but what a lot of large organizations do is make huge profits and only give COL raises.  Then they have a stagnate year with limited profit and use that as an excuse to hold salaries the same.  Rinse and repeat.  I would label this one if the causes of incomes going down relatively speaking and leads to more income inequality as kept at the highest levels and not shared as much with the lower income employees.

 

[Politician Spock]

There are many people in the lower/middle class that would take a heart attack in 20 years if they can keep their kid properly fed and clothed in the present.  No hyperbole.  Hard work does suck, but not working hard is a luxury for many.

Yep. Many corporations exploit their distress as well. In the board rooms is referred to as increased productivity. 

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Way too many broad brushes in here.  There are rich people that inherited money and don't work hard.  There are rich people that inherited money and still work hard.  There are rich people that worked hard and made themselves rich.  There are rich people that got lucky.  There are poor people that work their ### off and are still poor.  There are poor people that are lazy as hell.  And a lot more.

There is opportunity for people to make something better for themselves.  There are also people in ####ty situations with literally no hope or no education to have any hope.  

There are also people that have way too many children that they can't afford (which then passes the problem on to another generation), buy way too many gadgets/electronics they cannot afford, and generally make terrible decisions.

I'm not going to pretend to have the right answer because I don't think there is one.  But way too many broad brushes being painted all over the place in here.

 

[Zegras11]

.  There are rich people that got lucy.  

 

[AAABatteries]

I'm not going to pretend to have the right answer because I don't think there is one.  But way too many broad brushes being painted all over the place in here.

None of us have the answers, it's way too complex for any one answer anyway.  Agree on too many generalizations but the first thing we have to do is agree (on some level) that there is a problem.  I get the impression we haven't even done that. 

 

[bosoxs45]

All this.  And by the way, in my experience, it's not "work your ### off till the finish line" till you make it, and then you just kick back and watch the money roll in for the rest of your career.  For me it's work your ### off for a long time, and then once you "make it", continue working your ### off -- perhaps even harder than before -- if you want ot keep "making it."  It's not like you then finally just get to hang out and reap all the rewards from a lounge chair.  

And that's true for me and all the guys in my firm who are successful.  There are lots of guys in a law firm who did pretty well, ended up working in a law firm making decent money, but who never elevate to the next level, because they aren't tireless about it.  Maybe they make really nice money as associates but they'll never advance to partnership; maybe they advance to partnership but never do as well as the top partners; etc.  I've seen a direct correlation between the work and the results.  Some guys never "turn off" -- they are 24/7; others enjoy their evenings and weekends more.  Some folks are out the door at 5 or 6 and pretty much done for the night; others are there late, or are out the door at 5 or 6 but, after putting their kids to bed, are back online working for their "evening session."  Some guys are willing to jump on a plane and do the painful client development junkets and be away from their families; others don't really bother to make that effort.  

Again, not saying any of these choics are "better."  They can be grueling choices and come at a high price in a personal and family life, in your health, etc.  But those are the choices some people are just willing or programmed to make.  And they directly impact financial gains. And that's just in this one little setting. 

What about "Dave" living on the streets homeless and mentally ill? The system gave up on him along time ago. 

Link (Spotlight team did a series on this topic)

 

[parasaurolophus]

Increase profit is typically accomplished by increasing prices of goods and services, which increases the cost of living. Thus, the reason workers need cost of living increases is because a for profit economy naturally raises the cost of living. 

This is way too simplistic of a view. Some jobs become low skilled. Some services lose demand. Some costs go down. Sometimes costs go up and your selling price goes down. 

Even if those things all happen, workers simply expect COL raises because they have been conditioned to believe that is just how it works. 

 

[Politician Spock]

This is way too simplistic of a view. Some jobs become low skilled. Some services lose demand. Some costs go down. Sometimes costs go up and your selling price goes down. 

Even if those things all happen, workers simply expect COL raises because they have been conditioned to believe that is just how it works. 

That's why I said "increased profit is TYPICALLY accomplished by increasing prices of goods and services". Sometimes it is accomplished with other methods, as you point out. 

However, what I bolded in your post is a textbook example of a way too simplistic point of view. 

 

[Paulymaggs]

Regardless of the positions/sides in this thread, cant argue that America is still the country with the most opportunity to get ahead (not just become average middle-class) in the world.

 

[The Duff Man]

Having confidence and being willing to take risks are the two biggest factors to improving your lot in life in my opinion. 

As pointed out by others, many people who work hard are working hard at the wrong things. It is safer to keep your head down than speak up at work and stand out. It is safer to keep getting a paycheck than to start your own business. 

Most people who grow up in low income environments don't believe that taking risks will work out, so even if they work hard they don't get ahead. And many just don't bother to work hard...why bother (from their perspective)

Many who grow up in a better situation believe that they will succeed, which leads to them making choices that ensure that happens and maximizes the effectiveness of their hard work. 

I grew up dirt poor, most of my family still is. There are some who work harder than me for one quarter of the pay, and in my mind the only difference was that I was willing to stick my head above the rest and risk getting it chopped off. 

 

[Dedfin]

Regardless of the positions/sides in this thread, cant argue that America is still the country with the most opportunity to get ahead (not just become average middle-class) in the world.

I can't argue, but I also don't have any research on this subject.  The story that I hear is that it's tougher than it used to be.  If it is tougher than it used to be, have other countries caught up to the US?  Maybe some economist can helps us out.

 

[moleculo]

Regardless of the positions/sides in this thread, cant argue that America is still the country with the most opportunity to get ahead (not just become average middle-class) in the world.

sure you can.  Plenty of papers written on the subject, of varying conclusions.  Many researchers have found that the USA is middle of the pack WRT upwards mobility.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Hard work is a fine value but it's mainly going to differentiate you against your immediate peer group, and even them you likely need other tangible factors to really break away. Intelligence, charisma, social skills, and having a unique talent or skill are all probably just as or in many cases more important. Again, not to say hard work isn't a factor but it's probably way down on the list that begins with who your parents are for determining where you end up. 

US ranks near the bottom of OECD countries for inter-generational social mobility, and at the top for income inequality.  

 

[parasaurolophus]

That's why I said "increased profit is TYPICALLY accomplished by increasing prices of goods and services". Sometimes it is accomplished with other methods, as you point out. 

However, what I bolded in your post is a textbook example of a way too simplistic point of view. 

Its like you have never met americans before. 

 

[Politician Spock]

Hard work is a fine value but it's mainly going to differentiate you against your immediate peer group, and even them you likely need other tangible factors to really break away. Intelligence, charisma, social skills, and having a unique talent or skill are all probably just as or in many cases more important. Again, not to say hard work isn't a factor but it's probably way down on the list that begins with who your parents are for determining where you end up. 

US ranks near the bottom of OECD countries for inter-generational social mobility, and at the top for income inequality.  

Hard work only gets you ahead when others don't.

For example, if everyone decided a 50 hour work week is better than a 40 hour work week, then everyone who has been working 50 hours a week in the previous 40 hours per week society loses their advantage once society goes to 50 hours a week. Likewise if everyone decided a 30 hour work week is better than a 40 hour work week, then those who keep working 40 hours per week gain an advantage for doing absolutely nothing different once society goes to 30 hours a week. 

And it's not just time put in. It's effort, skill, talent, etc.... all these things end up in the end good or service your work produces. Those who have more to put into their work, win. Those who have less, lose. 

 

[Otis]

And it's not just time put in. It's effort, skill, talent, etc.... all these things end up in the end good or service your work produces. Those who have more to put into their work, win. Those who have less, lose. 

Isn't that basically a non socialist system that is working the way it should?

 

[St. Louis Bob]

I think a lot of the debate upthread about who is to blame for the plight of the poor is completely unrelated to factual disputes.

For whatever reason, I'm pretty sympathetic to the poor, even those that are lazy or made poor decisions or even those that abuse government services.  I can see myself in those people.  I'm lazy, I make bad decisions.  If I had been born into different circumstances, I can imagine living that way.

For some folks in this thread, you really seem to feel hostility on a gut level against people that you feel are mooching off the system.  I just don't really have that instinct in me.  I really can't explain why, but stories about people using food stamps to buy $41 birthday cakes don't upset me.

By contrast, I tend to have really negative feelings towards rich people that screw over others just to make themselves even richer.  Even if they're doing it legally.  It's just a gut level thing.  The article in today's New York Times about the private equity guys that made a ton of money by rescuing Hostess cupcakes from bankruptcy bothers me.   I can't see myself in those people.  But I know a lot of people that see absolutely nothing wrong with their conduct.  Business is business and it's a game just to make the most money you can even if others are hurt.  

I don't have a good explanation for why we have different gut level responses to this stuff.

A.MEN.

 

[Politician Spock]

Isn't that basically a non socialist system that is working the way it should?

Yep. Great for the winners, ain't it?

 

[St. Louis Bob]

To explain it as an either work hard, luck, lottery by birth is crazy.  It's a combination of things in probably every circumstance of every story here. 

Personally, did I work hard to get where I'm at?  #######ed right I did.  I worked every summer, Christmas, Spring break starting at age 12 through college before I dropped out.  When I got my first sales job, I worked late every night.  The thing is, we were quite poor until I was 10 or so.  Two of my strongest memories are when I was 6 and somebody stole my Huffy, this was in 1977, and my parents didn't have the money to buy me a new bike.  The other, about the same age, is I was hungry and went to the fridge and there was nothing but ketchup and mustard in there.  Being poor is the worst. I made money any and every way I could growing up.

The thing is, I also got really lucky.  My Dad is really intelligent.  Although he was just 21 when I was born and Mom was 19, he wasn't going to sit still and watch his kids be hungry.  Never saw the man unless I went to work with him on Saturdays, which I often did. So he worked, and worked, and worked some more.  Vacations were fishing at Table Rock lake and he always had a briefcase full of work to do the entire time we were there.  The lucky part is I had someone that I loved, admired and respected that was a great businessman. So my whole life it was like I had a personal tutor that I got to observe and learn from.  That makes thing a helluva lot easier.  Quit school at 21, because again, being poor sucks, but went at night for a few years.  I was making six figures by 23 and never looked back. Almost 46 now and really thinking about calling it a day.

I have a lot of admiration for the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" people that accomplished great things but be real honest about how you got there.  It's not cool to talk about giving to charity but I do all that I can.  I hope you all do too. I'm a really lucky fellow.

ETA

Really should have included that Dad left home at 15.  By every statistic out there, I should be in bad shape economically right now. Really lucky guy.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Also, make pennies worth a hundred dollars each.

 

[mr roboto]

You need to work hard at a thing that's worth working hard toward. 

Bob - sales is a perfect example. Hustle gets you more leads, converts more leads, improves the time a deal takes to close etc. 

Otis - law school. Working hard and being highly ranked in your class, putting in hours on cases as a first year associate etc. Lawyering is a ####### grind. The best and most dedicated have a ton of opportunity. 

Jim Bob the Union Plumber, Kathy the clerk at Kroger/Safeway/Albertsons, Devonte at McDonalds, Pedro at All Seasons Sprinkler Repair... I mean there's a bit of a difference in the upside of the 'work hard and you'll find your opportunity!!!!!' narrative for these folks. 

Sure there's a 'this McD's burger flipper went on to start a multi-hundred unit restaurant chain' story or two out there but the odds are ####### astronomically low. The celebrated 'mail boy to CEO' story line was never a viable strategy for 99.999% of people and even those unicorn stories are rarer because often the damn company is bought and sold so many times no one has any loyalty/history/sustained culture long enough to promote from within. 

What we  are currently experiencing is the logical progression of capitalism from a wage–based wealth generator to a investment–based wealth creator.  Concentration of wealth into the hands of those that own the means of production is not a surprising outcome to several centuries of relatively unfettered free market experimentation. 

Combine  this natural progression with the fact that we only have to go back about 50 years in our nations history to see what many would regard as the High Point of a free market system: the rise of the successful middle class in the 1950s and 1960s.   So many alive today still remember a time when a guy could graduate high school, go out and work hard for a company, stay employed for 20 or 30 or 40 years and retire with the pension. Anybody under the age of 40 knows that's a complete pipe dream for them but our national collective conscience reminds us that there was a day when a man could trade many hours of labor 'working hard' for a good life that provides his kids a better opportunity.  I'm afraid this narrative is a bout one half of a generation away from being entirely irrelevant. 

 

[mr roboto]

Also, make pennies worth a hundred dollars each.

This is the best ####### idea I've heard all year.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

To explain it as an either work hard, luck, lottery by birth is crazy.  It's a combination of things in probably every circumstance of every story here. 

Personally, did I work hard to get where I'm at?  #######ed right I did.  I worked every summer, Christmas, Spring break starting at age 12 through college before I dropped out.  When I got my first sales job, I worked late every night.  The thing is, we were quite poor until I was 10 or so.  Two of my strongest memories are when I was 6 and somebody stole my Huffy, this was in 1977, and my parents didn't have the money to buy me a new bike.  The other, about the same age, is I was hungry and went to the fridge and there was nothing but ketchup and mustard in there.  Being poor is the worst. I made money any and every way I could growing up.

The thing is, I also got really lucky.  My Dad is really intelligent.  Although he was just 21 when I was born and Mom was 19, he wasn't going to sit still and watch his kids be hungry.  Never saw the man unless I went to work with him on Saturdays, which I often did. So he worked, and worked, and worked some more.  Vacations were fishing at Table Rock lake and he always had a briefcase full of work to do the entire time we were there.  The lucky part is I had someone that I loved, admired and respected that was a great businessman. So my whole life it was like I had a personal tutor that I got to observe and learn from.  That makes thing a helluva lot easier.  Quit school at 21, because again, being poor sucks, but went at night for a few years.  I was making six figures by 23 and never looked back. Almost 46 now and really thinking about calling it a day.

I have a lot of admiration for the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" people that accomplished great things but be real honest about how you got there.  It's not cool to talk about giving to charity but I do all that I can.  I hope you all do too. I'm a really lucky fellow.

Again, no it's not cool and consifered gauche to talk about it but one of the things I like to do is buy bikes for all of the poor kids at the elementary school.  I was devastated when mine was stolen when I was a kid and when presented with the opportunity, it seemed to perfect. Over the last 6 years I bought 50+ bikes and they don't know they come from me.  It's considered the Christmas present between Mrs. SLB and myself.

Sorry, lilttle high and drunk.

 

[humpback]

I think we are talking past each other and mostly agreeing.  It sounds like we have different topics/ideas:

1. The plight of the low income earners.  How they got there - education, poor choices, lost the gene lottery (born poor or in some cases quite frankly, dumb), laziness.  Some are arguing work harder and make the most of your situation.  I agree with that sentiment, but I also acknowledge that doesn't work for everyone or even a large percentage of people.  There's lots of people who work hard and get nowhere.  This is where I pointed out that things like min wage increases, healthcare reform, and other items can help these folks.  The thing is people want to point to people to individual examples of people bettering themselves to say, "see, anybody can do it" - this ignores that most don't and we need to up what we consider to be an acceptable standard of living for our poor.

2. Income inequality.  This is more what is in that article - the movement of wealth continues to move from the bottom and middle to the very top.  This, I think, is unsustainable and contributes to underiable outcomes.  Discussing causes like automation was part of what I was discussing.  I think other causes is because organizations have kept more of the profits.

3.  The uber rich having too much power in our society - being too involved in our politics for personal or organizational gains

I sort of agree, which is why I keep trying to clarify what I'm saying as opposed to others:

1. I agree with a lot of this, but I've never really even addressed it in here- I'm only talking about whether income inequality is the cause of these issues.

2. Income inequality isn't exactly the same thing as wealth inequality, but I generally agree- again, it's more of a symptom than the disease, however.

3. Agree, but yet again, it's not caused by income inequality- IMO in our system the better off will always have way more power, even if they aren't "as rich".

 

[humpback]

None of us have the answers, it's way too complex for any one answer anyway.  Agree on too many generalizations but the first thing we have to do is agree (on some level) that there is a problem.  I get the impression we haven't even done that. 

Final attempt to clarify what I'm saying- I agree that there is a problem, but I don't agree that the problem is income inequality (at least I don't think it's near the top of the list). That's why I called it a red herring earlier- it's much easier to talk about income inequality than it is to actually address the drivers of income inequality.

 

[msommer]

Final attempt to clarify what I'm saying- I agree that there is a problem, but I don't agree that the problem is income inequality (at least I don't think it's near the top of the list). That's why I called it a red herring earlier- it's much easier to talk about income inequality than it is to actually address the drivers of income inequality.

What, pray tell, are those?

 

[humpback]

What, pray tell, are those?

I've already posted them- automation, globalization, QE/ZIRP, etc.

 

[humpback]

Hard work is a fine value but it's mainly going to differentiate you against your immediate peer group, and even them you likely need other tangible factors to really break away. Intelligence, charisma, social skills, and having a unique talent or skill are all probably just as or in many cases more important. Again, not to say hard work isn't a factor but it's probably way down on the list that begins with who your parents are for determining where you end up. 

US ranks near the bottom of OECD countries for inter-generational social mobility, and at the top for income inequality.  

Most of these things are intertwined. Sure, your parents are obviously big factors, but is that more because they hand you a business/money/connections, or because they instill values like hard work and determination? Same goes for "luck"- you could categorize pretty much anything as luck, including having the drive to work hard/succeed and having parents who instill those values. Likewise, you could argue that if you work hard, you can overcome some obstacles and become more charismatic, socially apt, skillful, etc. Hard work doesn't guarantee success, but it certainly increases your chances.

Again though, we'd be much better served focusing on how to improve the lot of those less fortunate, rather than chiding the rich for being lucky or the poor for being lazy (neither of which is necessarily true nor overly relevant IMO).

 

[Judge Smails]

Again, no it's not cool and consifered gauche to talk about it but one of the things I like to do is buy bikes for all of the poor kids at the elementary school.  I was devastated when mine was stolen when I was a kid and when presented with the opportunity, it seemed to perfect. Over the last 6 years I bought 50+ bikes and they don't know they come from me.  It's considered the Christmas present between Mrs. SLB and myself.

Sorry, lilttle high and drunk.

Way cool SLB....

 

[Gachi]

These kinds of threads always seem to consist of a bunch of guys discussing how much richer they are than the typical american . It's not that I have an issue with it, I just think it's funny. One day I wish to be able to do the same as an MD.

Anyways, how do you guys feel about the recent statistic of 30 year olds out-earning their parents? In 1970, 92% of 30 year olds earned more than their parents compared to 51% in 2016. 

 

[Zegras11]

Again though, we'd be much better served focusing on how to improve the lot of those less fortunate, rather than chiding the rich for being lucky or the poor for being lazy (neither of which is necessarily true nor overly relevant IMO).

This.   

 

[AAABatteries]

Again though, we'd be much better served focusing on how to improve the lot of those less fortunate, rather than chiding the rich for being lucky or the poor for being lazy (neither of which is necessarily true nor overly relevant IMO).

Higher wages - go.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

These kinds of threads always seem to consist of a bunch of guys discussing how much richer they are than the typical american . It's not that I have an issue with it, I just think it's funny. One day I wish to be able to do the same as an MD.

Anyways, how do you guys feel about the recent statistic of 30 year olds out-earning their parents? In 1970, 92% of 30 year olds earned more than their parents compared to 51% in 2016. 

Peak earning years are between 40-55.  Lots of things have changed since 1970 that contribute to that drop in statistics and not all are necessarily bad.

 

[Slapdash]

I also agree with Otis. Every successful person I know, myself included, worked their asses off to get there. None of it was "given" to them. And that includes the billionaire owners of the company that recently bought my company.

I will grant that some folks have a leg up - the middle class white kid has a much greater chance of making it than the inner city black kid. But that does not diminish the hard work the middle class white kid has to put in in order to be successful.

All this.  And by the way, in my experience, it's not "work your ### off till the finish line" till you make it, and then you just kick back and watch the money roll in for the rest of your career.  For me it's work your ### off for a long time, and then once you "make it", continue working your ### off -- perhaps even harder than before -- if you want ot keep "making it."  It's not like you then finally just get to hang out and reap all the rewards from a lounge chair.  

And that's true for me and all the guys in my firm who are successful.  There are lots of guys in a law firm who did pretty well, ended up working in a law firm making decent money, but who never elevate to the next level, because they aren't tireless about it.  Maybe they make really nice money as associates but they'll never advance to partnership; maybe they advance to partnership but never do as well as the top partners; etc.  I've seen a direct correlation between the work and the results.  Some guys never "turn off" -- they are 24/7; others enjoy their evenings and weekends more.  Some folks are out the door at 5 or 6 and pretty much done for the night; others are there late, or are out the door at 5 or 6 but, after putting their kids to bed, are back online working for their "evening session."  Some guys are willing to jump on a plane and do the painful client development junkets and be away from their families; others don't really bother to make that effort.  

Again, not saying any of these choics are "better."  They can be grueling choices and come at a high price in a personal and family life, in your health, etc.  But those are the choices some people are just willing or programmed to make.  And they directly impact financial gains. And that's just in this one little setting. 

Two main thoughts on this interesting exchange:

#1:  A lot of what you and kutta are describing seem to be how someone with the education, skillset, and profession to be in the top 5% of earners makes that next step to get into the top 1% or .1%.  Your surroundings make it harder to interact with the people who fell out of this race to get into a profession capable of generating this much income along the way.

2#:  When I read the sentence, I thought for sure the bolded word was going to be sacrifice.  I guess I can easily see a single person or one without kids making these choices. 

I can't see ever liking a job enough or having enough desire for money to make those choices.  I'll work hard, sometimes I'll work late....but when my last job started requiring 60hrs+ out of me to advance it was time to move along.  Didn't help that they were bad at what they do.  Life is too short for that

 

[Soonerman]

Yep. Great for the winners, ain't it?

So is socialism, only there are a lot fewer of them.  Hell, Castro was apparently a billionaire in a wretchedly poor country.  The nomenklatura in the old USSR all had their beach front dachas while the mass of people lined up for toilet paper.

 

[FUBAR]

These kinds of threads always seem to consist of a bunch of guys discussing how much richer they are than the typical american . It's not that I have an issue with it, I just think it's funny. One day I wish to be able to do the same as an MD.

Anyways, how do you guys feel about the recent statistic of 30 year olds out-earning their parents? In 1970, 92% of 30 year olds earned more than their parents compared to 51% in 2016. 

Peak earning years are between 40-55.  Lots of things have changed since 1970 that contribute to that drop in statistics and not all are necessarily bad.

Almost posted the same.  Why should a 30yo make more than her 60yo dad?  Sure if she's in a more valuable field - which 51% seems about right. 

 

[FUBAR]

Yep. Great for the winners, ain't it?

Seems to me we should reward what we want to encourage.  There are things we can and should fix, but if your biggest complaint boils down to our rewarding people who achieve more, we're doing alright. 

 

[msommer]

Almost posted the same.  Why should a 30yo make more than her 60yo dad?  Sure if she's in a more valuable field - which 51% seems about right. 

When I was 30 I made more than my dad. Granted, I was living in Brazil on an expat package so...

 

[msommer]

Seems to me we should reward what we want to encourage.  There are things we can and should fix, but if your biggest complaint boils down to our rewarding people who achieve more, we're doing alright. 

I have no issues with rewarding winners. What I would like to see is more people with little or no opportunity to win, and even less for their children

 

[FUBAR]

I have no issues with rewarding winners. What I would like to see is more people with little or no opportunity to win, and even less for their children

When I was 30 I made more than my dad. Granted, I was living in Brazil on an expat package so...

I was too, dad was a teacher.  Teachers get paid poorly. 

 

[humpback]

Almost posted the same.  Why should a 30yo make more than her 60yo dad?  Sure if she's in a more valuable field - which 51% seems about right. 

It's more than their parents did at the same age.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Seems to me we should reward what we want to encourage.  There are things we can and should fix, but if your biggest complaint boils down to our rewarding people who achieve more, we're doing alright. 

The concern is that we are becoming a winner takes all economy, particularly as automation pushes humans into even more specialized work roles with more competition for fewer jobs. 

 

[humpback]

Higher wages - go.

Generally a good thought. However, it wouldn't really help the millions of unemployed (and would almost certainly cause that number to grow), and would exacerbate many of the drivers of income inequality (automation, offshoring, etc.). In the short term we should focus on closing the current skills gap by promoting those jobs and re-training people to qualify for them, but ultimately moving towards a BIG would have the largest impact IMO.

 

[GROOT]

Some people suck with money. There's your answer.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Some people suck with money. There's your answer.

There really is a ton of truth here. There is almost no practical financial learning in high school. People have zero concept of tax brackets, budgets, saving, etc. 

This is an area that needs to be improved and would make a huge difference.