For 90% of workers they are worse off then they were under the Bush economic recovery!

I think you messed up on this line. I believe you meant "For 90% of workers they are worse off under the Bush economic recovery!"

Try again oh clueless one!

WWW Link

Unemployment down to 4.7%. And I thought there weren't any jobs out there.

WWW Link

Productivity up 1.6% in 2nd qtr 2006. Seems we doing better and better or am I reading this wrong?

According to the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics "every" occupation in PA reported a "rise" in wages. Not one posted a negative!

WWW Link

Wow, I had no idea that I was in the top 10%. I must have potloads of money around here someplace. I need to start looking for it.

Wrong again, old Mistaken One.

haha...mason....same here....my wages keep going up....and i am just a lowly sales floor associate at my local Walmart....

Same for my wife, her wages keep going up every 6 months or so....and she works at the local McDonalds....

Go figure....

There has been increases in the weekly wage. The issue is after TAXES AND INFLATION. Both agencies reported overall and after taxes and inflation the weekly wage is lower except for the top 10% nationally and the top 5% in PA.

As for unemployment-- In 2000 the unemployment rate was 3.9%.Again new jobs are being created but they pay less then the jobs that were lost during the first three years of the Bush Administration and to be at the same place in employment (numbers only) we need another 1 million jobs to bring the unemployment rate to what it was when Bush took office.

[ FOR THE WEEK OF 9-4-2006 ]


The State of Working America 2006/2007
On Labor Day, the Economic Policy Institute releases its advance edition of The State of Working America 2006/2007. Prepared biennially since 1988, EPI's flagship publication sums up the problems and challenges facing American workers, presenting analyses of the latest data on family incomes, wages, income mobility, international comparisons, wealth, and poverty. Now in its 10th edition, the book's authors continue the tradition of closely examining the economy's affect on the living standards of the American people. With over 300 tables and charts, The State of Working America 2006/2007 is the comprehensive reference work consulted by those wanting a portrait of the economic well-being of the nation's workforce. Visit the StateOfWorkingAmerica.org Web site for a host of online resources, including the book's executive summary, introduction, and excerpted chapters as well as fact sheets, Economic Snapshots, press releases, and a full archive of every table and figure that appears in the printed book.



http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/intro_exec.html

(Citizen)COL GeneSeptember 6, 2006 11:01:10

Are you stupid? Did you just completely ignore the links by drmiller and me? No wait, I'm stupid, for even thinking that you would look at it at all. You only look at information that fits you agenda.

BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER! BUSH HATER!  

Moveon.org is unimpressed with Bush as well.

EPI.org is a left-wing think tank.

About EPI "America's working families deserve policies that support their families, provide a fair share of our nation's prosperity, and guarantee a secure retirement."

This is a classic example of liberals using other people to think for them which I wrote about here:

https://www.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=26937

Col Gene relies on a left-wing analysis site to tell him what to think rather than looking at the raw data. As a result, he fell prey to pretty superficial data manipulation.  If you want to make convincing arguments, look at the raw data yourself and post links to the raw data. Don't post links to some left wing website that has an article with massaged data and pre-existing analysis.

Like I said, a classic example.  Here is what I wrote about this over TWO years ago:

In on-line discussions, liberals are much more likely to cite analysis of data as a "source".  There is no Michael Moore of the right because conservatives wouldn't put up with the manipulation of facts like liberals do.  But liberals don't tend to look for the underlying facts. The analysis, for them, is good enough.

 

 

My wages are down.   

Oh, wait, that's because I can't work as many hours, because of school! But I suppose I should blame the administration for my own scheduling problems . . .

(Citizen)Charles.CSeptember 6, 2006 11:08:34

Did you honestly bother to type all that for the Col.? Too much effort.

Did you honestly bother to type all that for the Col.? Too much effort.

   That's what the cut and paste shortcut on the keyboards are for. Hehe.

We've been over this.

In a globalized economy, American wages are going to go down.

American wages are going to go down regardless of what the President does. If he's an economic genius and incredibly lucky, he might be able to slow the rate of wage decreases, but that's about it.

Gene, what did you seriously expect to happen, once American workers started competing with Indian workers and Chinese workers and Mexican workers?

By global standards, Americans are extremely overpaid. Globalization means that will change.

This is the Report on PA wages. You Bush supporters are all out to lunch just like Bush!!!!!!!




Wages & Income Decline Benefits Decline Growth Slows Needed: A Plan
Overview
Following the brief 2001 recession, the United States and Pennsylvania economies have been growing now for nearly five years. U.S. productivity has grown more rapidly recently than at any point since the 1950s. Yet, over the same period, wages and income have stagnated across most income groups.

With one exception, the past five years represent a return to the economic trends of the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s-and a departure from the broadly shared prosperity of the latter part of the 1990s. The exception: The economic benefits of the past five years have accrued to an even narrower band at the top of the income scale. Wage stagnation, coupled with higher costs for health insurance and gasoline, and erosion of pension protection, help to explain polling data that indicate continuing economic insecurity, despite relatively robust economic growth.

Current policy debates center primarily around government's role in creating conditions conducive to economic growth--levels of taxation and government spending, investment in economic development projects, and other policies. Our analysis points to the need for more attention to the link between economic growth and improving incomes. Simply put, in addition to policies that sustain growth, Pennsylvania families need policies that translate economic and productivity growth into higher living standards. They need this because, as the statistics below amply demonstrate, a more prosperous Pennsylvania economy is not currently translating into greater individual and family prosperity.

Wages Decline While Profits Rise
Adjusted for inflation, wages in Pennsylvania rose steadily from 1997 to 2001 but have stagnated since then. The median hourly wage'right in the middle of the earnings curve'fell to $14.21 in 2005, down 2.3% from $14.55 (in 2005 dollars) in 2004. Wages have declined not only in the middle of the earnings curve but at the low end and even for relatively high-wage earners. At the low end, Pennsylvania earnings fell for the fourth year in a row, to $7.33 per hour. Near the top end of the wage distribution'the 90th percentile'wages have now fallen for three years in a row. High-wage Pennsylvania earners made $32.45 in 2002 but only $30.94 in 2005. Only at the very top of the earnings curve, at and above the 95th percentile, did wages in Pennsylvania grow last year. In the United States as a whole, pay grew especially rapidly in percentage terms for CEO's at they very pinnacle of the wage distribution (No Pennsylvania-specific data exist on CEO pay.)

While wages for most workers fell, inflation-adjusted profits in the United States rose by 13% in 2005, to $1.35 trillion, their highest level ever and the fourth year in a row of rapid increases.


Wages Drop at Every Education Level
Across Pennsylvania and the United States, economists and the public have grown used to seeing wages for college-educated workers rise while those for workers with a high school education or less fall. In the past several years, however, wages in Pennsylvania and nationally have stagnated or declined at every education level.

The median wages of college-educated Pennsylvania workers fell from $22.76 per hour in 2002 to $21.72 in 2005. The median wages of Pennsylvania workers with some college education fell from a peak of $13.75 in 2004 to $12.97 in 2005. Pennsylvania workers with a high school education actually fared slightly better in relative terms, seeing a decline of only 11 cents per hour (from $12.70 in 2002 to $12.59 in 2005) A Break From the Shared Prosperity of 1995-2000
The periods 1995-2000 and 2000-2004/05 were similar periods of robust growth measured by increases in productivity. Yet trends in Pennsylvania wages, income, benefits, poverty, and other key economic variables differ dramatically between these two periods.

For example, median family income in Pennsylvania rose 14.5% from 1995 to 2000 but then fell 7.2% from 2000 to 2004. College-educated Pennsylvania workers' wages rose 9% from 1995 to 2000 before dropping 5% by 2005. The number of Pennsylvanians in poverty fell 29% from 1995-2000 but rose nearly 33% from 2000 to 2004. The number of Pennsylvanians without health insurance fell 12.5% from 1995 to 2000 but climbed 22.6% from 2000 to 2004. Slow Job Recovery After 2001 Recession
One factor contributing to wage stagnation is the slow job recovery evident in Pennsylvania and nationally following the short 2001 recession. While job growth has been healthier in the last three years, relative to the size of the labor force and the size of the working-age population recent job growth has not yet made up for the slow growth from 2001 to 2003. As a result, for example, Pennsylvania labor force participation in 2005 remained 1.1 percentage points below the level of 2002.

An Economic Plan for the Rest of Us
Many economists believe that productivity and living standards are necessarily linked and that higher productivity will translate, over time, into higher wages. The lesson that emerges from this report is that while higher productivity growth is necessary to higher living standards for the majority, it does not guarantee them.

A corollary lesson is that government policy should seek to re-establish a link between the strength of the economy and overall living standards.

This summer, in an important step that will most benefit low-income families, the Pennsylvania legislature and governor passed an increase in the state's minimum wage. Pennsylvania policies have also moved forward in the areas of workforce development and renewable energy, as outlined at the end of this report.

Acknowledging some progress, however, should not obscure the message implicit in recent economic statistics that more change-comprehensive, deep, and sustained change-is needed if prosperity is to be more broadly shared in Pennsylvania. Given the skewed distribution of gains from growth in recent years, "old economy" economic measures that look at overall or average economic performance'such as output and productivity growth, even job growth'tell us little about the economic conditions of typical families. Pennsylvania must develop the analytical and policy tools to more accurately understand and react to the real state of working Pennsylvania.

To assist with this development over the next six months, the Keystone Research Center will seek to stimulate a broader and more informed discussion about a range of critical topics: workforce development, job creation, economic security (including health and retirement security), energy policy and environmentally sustainable development, and taxation.

Ultimately, of course, the direction that economic policy will take in Pennsylvania will depend on the actions of our elected representatives. In this election year it is appropriate that all Pennsylvanians ask candidates standing for office a simple question: What is your economic plan for the 90+ percent of Pennsylvanians not currently benefiting from economic growth?

As our analysis suggests, it may be the most important question voters can ask in 2006.