though. Plenty of more academically-minded PhD's won't see that kind of
money, well, ever, likely, save for a choice tenure at a school with a
very large endowment. Some PhD's may be able to demand that kind of
money, but a 26-year old, fresh out of school with his Philsophical
Doctorate of Art Theory isn't necessarily going to be raking in the
green right out of the gate; and may well be pondering the
epistemological influence of the Hardees logo on the fry box he's busy
loading up for the drive-thru. Extra ketchup.
- Jim
Sam Morris wrote:
>But when you say people with PhDs are now flipping
>burgers that implies many people that were earning
>over $100k are now earning less than $20k. The numbers
>don't support that theory.
>
>I'm not saying the unemployment numbers are rosy, just
>that they aren't as gloomy as some claims.
>
>-sm
>
>
>--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Also the following. 0.4% is not exactly riproaring
>>growth.
>>
>>ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/realer.txt
>>
>>
>> Internet Address: http://www.bls.gov/ces/
>> Technical information: (202) 691-6555 USDL
>>04-1807
>> Media contact: 691-5902
>>
>>
>>TRANSMISSION OF MATERIAL
>> IN THIS
>>RELEASE IS EMBARGOED
>> UNTIL
>>8:30 AM EDT, THURSDAY,
>> SEPTEMBER
>>16, 2004
>>
>> REAL EARNINGS IN AUGUST
>>2004
>>
>> Real average weekly earnings increased by 0.3
>>percent from July to August
>>after seasonal adjustment, according to preliminary
>>data released today by the
>>Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of
>>Labor. A 0.3 percent
>>increase in average hourly earnings was partially
>>offset by a 0.1 percent
>>increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage
>>Earners and
>>Clerical Workers
>>(CPI-W). Average weekly hours were unchanged.
>>
>> Data on average weekly earnings are collected
>>from the payroll reports of
>>private nonfarm establishments. Earnings of both
>>full-time and part-time
>>workers holding production or nonsupervisory jobs
>>are included. Real average
>>weekly earnings are calculated by adjusting earnings
>>in current dollars for
>>changes in the CPI-W.
>>
>> Average weekly earnings rose by 2.9 percent,
>>seasonally adjusted, from
>>August 2003 to August 2004. After deflation by the
>>CPI-W, average weekly
>>earnings increased by 0.4 percent. Before
>>adjustment for seasonal change and
>>inflation, average weekly earnings were $536.94 in
>>August 2004, compared with
>>$519.01 a year earlier.
>> _____________________________
>>
>> Real Earnings for September 2004 will be
>>released on Tuesday,
>>October 19,
>>2004.
>>
>>
>>
>>On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:39:33 -0600, dana tierney
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Fast look at this link off your link indicates
>>>
>>>
>>modest growth in a few
>>
>>
>>>sectors -- financial amongst them -- but a mostly
>>>
>>>
>>flat manufacturing
>>
>>
>>>and "other" sector.
>>>
>>>ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/jec.txt
>>>
>>>Sam, there is probably a measure of
>>>
>>>
>>underemployment, will look later.
>>
>>
>>>You're in the right place to find it yourself
>>>
>>>
>>though...
>>
>>
>>>Dana
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Subject: Re: The Election and The Economy
>>>To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>>I don't know enough about this to analize it by
>>>factoring inflation etc..
>>>But the wages have gone up.
>>>
>>>ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.ceseeb2.txt
>>>
>>>http://bls.gov/ces/home.htm#analytical
>>>
>>>-sm
>>>
>>>--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>isn't there an axiom somewhere, that all
>>>>
>>>>
>>politics is
>>
>>
>>>>local?
>>>>
>>>>I have not yet looked at Sam's numbers (or any
>>>>others on the subject)
>>>>but do they make any reference to TYPE of job
>>>>created? I seem to
>>>>remember reading somewhere that the
>>>>
>>>>
>>administraton
>>
>>
>>>>was trying to count
>>>>fast-food as manufacturing job creation.
>>>>
>>>>Dana
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:03:00 -0400
>>>>Subject: Re: The Election and The Economy
>>>>To: CF-Community
>>>>
>>>>
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>
>>>>At 13:58 9/27/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>My point is people say we lost so many jobs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>since
>>
>>
>>>>Bush
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>took office, I can't find the million lost jobs
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>in
>>
>>
>>>>>those numbers. Also, everyone seems to compare
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>todays
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>numbers to 2000's which was a very rare low. If
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>we
>>
>>
>>>>>compare unemployment to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>OK. That seems to be a valid argument. I for
>>>>
>>>>
>>one
>>
>>
>>>>believe the Bush
>>>>administration has done a great job with the
>>>>economic recovery. Of course
>>>>it's a little hard to tell that to someone who
>>>>doesn't have a job
>>>>though.
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
