Where will inflation stop?

We also tend to think of managers as people who only manage other people. 

That's not true either. My boss is a manager, but he's also a technical expert. He knows a tremendous amount about our systems and can diagnose issues when needed. Those are skills he gained through being exposed to those problems while someone else was there to explain how to fix them. Now, he barely has time to explain those systems to us, much less how to fix them. 

We're adding people to our team in order to free up everyone to spend a little more time learning the technical details. His hope is that eventually one of us will be in a spot where we can take over his role and he can move up. 

Another problem however is that my boss is very Type A personality. He's very organized and detail oriented. Has an Outlook Calender full of minute-by-minute tasks and reminders. Not everybody can or wants to do that. My boss is far more organized than people WAY above his paygrade who rely on Executive Assistants to do all that for them. 

That's where the gap is. We've got three tiers of workers:

- the laborer or comfortable white-collar employee. They get good enough at their job that they know it well, and can do it efficiently, but they can't pay the bills. 

- the mid-level manager or "technical expert" - these folks have gotten the pay bump to make life comfortable, but are now stuck between leveraging that past experience and skills and herding cats. Their "boring" work is trying to keep everyone on task or managing meetings and schedules. 

- the upper management - these folks are making good money, and they get to apply their technical skills and experiences - but they also deligate all these day-to-day tasks to other people. They aren't doing menial work anymore. 

I think the problem we're facing in the American workforce is we've got a lot of folks in the first group making pennies compared to the other two groups, but the first group is also the driver of our economy. 

In reply to pheller :

Maybe it is because I am friends with a bunch of engineers but none of my friends or myself fit into any of those groups.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to AaronT :

Ironically enough, a lot of the labor shortage is because people's 401ks are doing so well, they used Covid as a good reason to retire early. 90% of the people who left the workforce are over 55.

You can't find people willing to work at the diner for $2.15 an hour because they got a higher paying job, that was probably vacated by someone else giving themself a raise by moving up.  If I got a job doing whatever at $40k/year I ain't going back to waiting tables or flipping burgers.

 

jIf you want cheap labor again, tank the stock market.

Depending on people over 55 for cheap labor?? Good luck with that. Some of them already died of Covid. Some of them own their houses outright, can live cheaply and don't need to work. Many of them have health problems like arthritis or heart disease that would keep them from waiting tables, working retail and taking other jobs that require you stand up all day. And they are starting to die off. Every day you lose a few more to the grim reaper. Of couse they are not coming back. Cutting marginal unemployment benefits won't change this a bit.

I am not suggesting that they take low paying grunt jobs.  I would assume they would go back to whatever it was they were doing beforehand.

A lot of Japan's economic issues stem from a lack of inflation and the elderly not leaving the workforce.  This is causing enough economic anxiety that a lot of people under 30 don't even date, let alone consider starting a family.  And the government pays you to have children there! (As in direct money transfer, not the US style indirect payment via tax rebates)

I'm sorry I haven't made it clear.  Once you pass about age  55 employers do not want to hire you.  
   I have a massively impressive resume  of success. Yet in spite of wonderful recommendations. Impressive work history.  10's of thousands of resumes sent. With help from several HR people and other resume writing services.   In 8 years of job application. Both in person and on line I got only 1 call back.  I wore out and resoled every nice pair of shoes I owned several times. Knocking on doors.  Networking and putting in many hours trying to find employment.  
 My flaw ? I was over 55 then over 60.  
    It's not just my career, those of us past that cut off know about and accept it as just the way things are.  
L
  I can't go back, most of us can't go back.  Because younger ( and cheaper ) people have replaced us.  
   It's like we've been shoved out of line and can't get back in even at entry level jobs.  
   So when shoved out you too will recognize the truth of my statement. Hopefully by then you own the company and what shoved you out is enough money to retire comfortably. 

93EXCivic said:

In reply to pheller :

Maybe it is because I am friends with a bunch of engineers but none of my friends or myself fit into any of those groups.

Are you over 55?   

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to AaronT :

People with money influencing policy and getting that sweet corporate welfare is capitalism working as intended. Perhaps not as advertised, but the current economic climate is the direct outcome of supply-side/trickle-down/Reaganomics. No one has ever mathematically proven supply side economics but it has festered into the current state of being.
 

It's not perfect, but show me a better system. The problem with trickle down is people who put little effort or skill into the system and complain when money isn't falling into their laps. But what we have right now is the exact friggin' opposite of trickle down. We told businesses that they must close, we told people not to go out. We gave people boatloads of money to not work. Now our economy is hamstrung with labor shortages. There has never been a better time to get a job, and jobs are paying more than they ever have before. Now to no one's  surprise that can do math, the cost of doing business has gone up and that cost gets passed on to customers. 
 

As for people with money influencing policy, who would you have influencing policy? You say that like it's a negative thing, but who else do you propose? Walk me through how people without money influencing policy makes more sense. Not that it doesn't happen, it's happening at a record pace in many places in the country, but it's not working out so well so far. Hence the topic of this discussion. 

Not everything is black or white.  Half of the country believes one thing another half believe the other thing. Most of us though are somewhere in the middle. 
     Not all of those poor people have no education, ambition,  or common sense.  Yes some do. However not everyone who spends their life in poverty  is that way. 
  Too easy to generalize. Cherry pick a few and say , See?   
     Take a walk through a county sponsored Senior respite  home ( we used to call them old folks homes).  The stories they tell will often reflect injuries or loss, real problems they failed to over come.   Not drug use,  or lack of ambition.  Real obstacles  preventing a successful life. Illness, disease, handicaps, accidents, etc.  

As you walk through those smelly hallways  you'll see real anguish, despair depression.  
 Sad to say those are the people who cost the most in welfare.  They have nothing left.  

In reply to frenchyd :

Not everything is black or white.  Half of the country believes one thing another half believe the other thing. Most of us though are somewhere in the middle. 
     Not all of those poor people have no education, ambition,  or common sense.  Yes some do. However not everyone who spends their life in poverty  is that way. 
  Too easy to generalize. Cherry pick a few and say , See?   
     Take a walk through a county sponsored Senior respite  home ( we used to call them old folks homes).  The stories they tell will often reflect injuries or loss, real problems they failed to over come.   Not drug use,  or lack of ambition.  Real obstacles  preventing a successful life. Illness, disease, handicaps, accidents, etc.  

As you walk through those smelly hallways  you'll see real anguish, despair depression.  
 Sad to say those are the people who cost the most in welfare.  They have nothing left.  

People can believe whatever they want, it doesn't make it true. I've seen much more evidence that you are the master of your own fate than that there is a system trying to keep you down. I've mentioned this before, poor/middle class/wealthy and everywhere in between are phases many people transition through in life. Some visit each phase on multiple occasions, some never experience each phase. For the most part, this discussion is directed toward the young. Young people are often poor due to the lack of skills and experience. Many of them want success NOW, but that's just not realistic and not how life works for most people. It doesn't help when others tell them they deserve it now, and it's the system keeping them down. The one tool that many people squander when striving to amass wealth is time. The younger you are the better position you are to accumulate wealth when you are older. But many young people don't think that like that, the future is a long ways away. Until it gets here. Then it's easier to blame others. You don't need a large income to accumulate wealth. It helps, but many have done it on modest incomes by living well within their means. Everyone is free to make their own choices in life, but our lives are also shaped by those choices. 
 

Frenchd, you are a statistical outlier to the Nth degree. By your own words, you are the only poor millionaire that I know. A few posts ago you lamented about how tough it is for someone in their 20's to get into wheel to wheel racing for under $10k. You also posted how unfair it is that you have to work at 73. Knowing that you were heavily into racing, I thought of an interesting exercise. I have no idea how much you spent on racing, so for the sake of this exercise I figured the same $10k, which is admittedly quite a bit in 1982 money. I don't know the timeline, so I chose 40 years ago, 1982. Had you invested that money instead, with the average rate of return, that $10k would be worth $683k now. Now, I'm not saying that you made a bad choice, just that you made a choice, whether you realize it or not. You may have made the right choice, your experiences and memories are likely priceless. There are no guarantees in life, and it's also sad to me when someone spends their whole life saving and doesn't get to enjoy it. My point is, everyone makes choices that dictates the arc of their life. The right choice is up to each unique individual, as are the results. For fairness sake, I did a similar exercise for myself. I bought a car I didn't need but really liked in 1999. I paid $13k, which worked out to about $19k after taxes and interest in 1999 dollars. Had I invested that money in 1999, it would be worth $120k now. Now, I didn't have $19k in cash, so if I had socked it away for 5 years and put it in the market in 2004, it would still be worth just under $90k today. I would have missed out on all of the enjoyment the car brought me. But I had other cars that I enjoyed at the time, and $90k would buy me a pretty nice car today. Or I could leave that $90k market for another 2o years and it would be worth just under a projected $500k at retirement time. Do you see what I just did there? I used the same tools that the wealthy use to build wealth. 

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

I'm 57 and looking to retire before I'm 60.  Ditto my wife, who is about 1.5 years older than I am.  We're both college educated.  I have a graduate degree.

I would say that we've only started to feel 'successful' within the last 5-10 years.  When we were 30?  Forget it, even though we were both in solid positions with good paying jobs.  There just wasn't enough road behind us yet to feel 'successful'.

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

Let me correct you.  My first race car was a 1948 Buick Straight 8  in Hobby class a friends grandmother gave him.  We goobered a swing set into a roll bar.  ( seatbelts weren't required). ( 1962). A football helmet with the bar cut off was the only safety gear I had.  It was a good race if I finished high enough to win back my $2 entry fee. 
     I raced in SCCA during the times I wasn't at sea or in Vietnam  the car was a Jaguar XK150 I bought for $300. And post service sold for $600. I think entry fees were around $22. Back then I remember my only National was almost $40.  My fuel was Aviation 114/145 I got from the squadron's  fuel bowser for free.    
        In 1976 I started vintage racing with my daily driver. A1953 MGTD ( still have it) 
      We borrowed safety gear like helmet, suit, fire extinguisher,and seat belts.  
  Entry was actually free  but we put $5 in the club kitty. 
      Did pretty well and later bought the Black Jack Special. For $300. ( delivered)  

Did pretty well with that, bought an old Corvette for •••$300 put it together and sold it for $900. Did well in SCCA with that and had a good reputation for reliability. And finishing well.  Started to get some race preparation work I did after regular work hours.   Drove the DeMar special after restoring it for him. Won 12 of 13 races entered. From then on I worked all my spare time get mine and others cars race ready.They paid my entry fee and I'd crew chief for them.  Plus they'd pay me to get their car to the track and I'd pull mine  on the trailer behind the ramp truck. 
    Only two races entered on my own dime. 
  Sold the Black Jack special for only $55,000*

        So nope.  No money spent racing. Not really
* A couple of years earlier  I'd been offered $250,000 for it, which considering the multi million dollar car I was beating was still low.  

93EXCivic said:

In reply to pheller :

Maybe it is because I am friends with a bunch of engineers but none of my friends or myself fit into any of those groups.

I'm curious then - do you manage people without using any of your previous non-management skills or experiences? 

Or are you a supervisor who really doesn't manage anyone, but is more of a team lead? If you're this, you are in the 2nd group. 

If you're lucky enough not to manage anyone, but still make enough money to feel successful, then congrats! 

I think my point was - the vast majority of the economy is made up of people who aren't Mid or Upper - Management, and haven't seen a real wage increase in ages. Most people who work for themselves (trades) make decent money, but will be burnt out with it later in life.

frenchyd said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to AaronT :

Ironically enough, a lot of the labor shortage is because people's 401ks are doing so well, they used Covid as a good reason to retire early. 90% of the people who left the workforce are over 55.

You can't find people willing to work at the diner for $2.15 an hour because they got a higher paying job, that was probably vacated by someone else giving themself a raise by moving up.  If I got a job doing whatever at $40k/year I ain't going back to waiting tables or flipping burgers.

 

jIf you want cheap labor again, tank the stock market.

Depending on people over 55 for cheap labor?? Good luck with that. Some of them already died of Covid. Some of them own their houses outright, can live cheaply and don't need to work. Many of them have health problems like arthritis or heart disease that would keep them from waiting tables, working retail and taking other jobs that require you stand up all day. And they are starting to die off. Every day you lose a few more to the grim reaper. Of couse they are not coming back. Cutting marginal unemployment benefits won't change this a bit.

I am not suggesting that they take low paying grunt jobs.  I would assume they would go back to whatever it was they were doing beforehand.

A lot of Japan's economic issues stem from a lack of inflation and the elderly not leaving the workforce.  This is causing enough economic anxiety that a lot of people under 30 don't even date, let alone consider starting a family.  And the government pays you to have children there! (As in direct money transfer, not the US style indirect payment via tax rebates)

I'm sorry I haven't made it clear.  Once you pass about age  55 employers do not want to hire you.  
   I have a massively impressive resume  of success. Yet in spite of wonderful recommendations. Impressive work history.  10's of thousands of resumes sent. With help from several HR people and other resume writing services.   In 8 years of job application. Both in person and on line I got only 1 call back.  I wore out and resoled every nice pair of shoes I owned several times. Knocking on doors.  Networking and putting in many hours trying to find employment.  
 My flaw ? I was over 55 then over 60.  
    It's not just my career, those of us past that cut off know about and accept it as just the way things are.  
L
  I can't go back, most of us can't go back.  Because younger ( and cheaper ) people have replaced us.  
   It's like we've been shoved out of line and can't get back in even at entry level jobs.  
   So when shoved out you too will recognize the truth of my statement. Hopefully by then you own the company and what shoved you out is enough money to retire comfortably. 

Not sure that is always true. I was hired by two different firms after the age of 60. I still get calls from recruiters on a weekly basis. But grey hair is actually respected in my profession. Mrs. Snowdoggie is a Creative Director in an Advertising Agency. She is in her 50s and feels her current gig may be her last. But she is OK with that. She hates office politics. She actually wants to retire and do freelance work from home. With her experience with major ad agencies she could actually do that. I am the crazy man who wants to keep working. I'm like the sled dog who keeps pulling because he wants to see something new around the next corner. Interesting cases. New technology. More interesting work. I will probably die at my desk. Hopefully around age 100.

I have a cousin over 60 who keeps starting and running new successful businesses. His latest is cremating pets and putting them in wood boxes. He gets his referrals from his son who is a vet and every other vet in the area. The rural area where he lives has no other business doing this. He has also done real estate, printing and construction. He was forcibly retired from a C Level Fortune 500 job more 20 years ago. He never worked for a big company ever again. He drives around in a pusher motorhome that I couldn't even afford to put gas in and he is probably worth more than a million dollars.

In reply to frenchyd :

I stand corrected. I'd wager that fielding a quarter million dollar car for little money out of pocket without sponsorship is pretty unique, then and now. While many of us have funded our hobbies in a similar fashion, one would be hard pressed to duplicate at that level. And it's not just because of inflation or wage gap, but because of the extra costs of racing vs. then. Cars are still cheap. But safety gear and insurance are a huge part of the cost that are mostly afterthoughts back then. 
 

You should start a thread detailing your racing experience and sharing some of your stories, I'm sure a lot of people would be interested. Probably make a good magazine article. 

Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:

frenchyd said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to AaronT :

Ironically enough, a lot of the labor shortage is because people's 401ks are doing so well, they used Covid as a good reason to retire early. 90% of the people who left the workforce are over 55.

You can't find people willing to work at the diner for $2.15 an hour because they got a higher paying job, that was probably vacated by someone else giving themself a raise by moving up.  If I got a job doing whatever at $40k/year I ain't going back to waiting tables or flipping burgers.

 

jIf you want cheap labor again, tank the stock market.

Depending on people over 55 for cheap labor?? Good luck with that. Some of them already died of Covid. Some of them own their houses outright, can live cheaply and don't need to work. Many of them have health problems like arthritis or heart disease that would keep them from waiting tables, working retail and taking other jobs that require you stand up all day. And they are starting to die off. Every day you lose a few more to the grim reaper. Of couse they are not coming back. Cutting marginal unemployment benefits won't change this a bit.

I am not suggesting that they take low paying grunt jobs.  I would assume they would go back to whatever it was they were doing beforehand.

A lot of Japan's economic issues stem from a lack of inflation and the elderly not leaving the workforce.  This is causing enough economic anxiety that a lot of people under 30 don't even date, let alone consider starting a family.  And the government pays you to have children there! (As in direct money transfer, not the US style indirect payment via tax rebates)

I'm sorry I haven't made it clear.  Once you pass about age  55 employers do not want to hire you.  
   I have a massively impressive resume  of success. Yet in spite of wonderful recommendations. Impressive work history.  10's of thousands of resumes sent. With help from several HR people and other resume writing services.   In 8 years of job application. Both in person and on line I got only 1 call back.  I wore out and resoled every nice pair of shoes I owned several times. Knocking on doors.  Networking and putting in many hours trying to find employment.  
 My flaw ? I was over 55 then over 60.  
    It's not just my career, those of us past that cut off know about and accept it as just the way things are.  
L
  I can't go back, most of us can't go back.  Because younger ( and cheaper ) people have replaced us.  
   It's like we've been shoved out of line and can't get back in even at entry level jobs.  
   So when shoved out you too will recognize the truth of my statement. Hopefully by then you own the company and what shoved you out is enough money to retire comfortably. 

Not sure that is always true. I was hired by two different firms after the age of 60. I still get calls from recruiters on a weekly basis. But grey hair is actually respected in my profession. Mrs. Snowdoggie is a Creative Director in an Advertising Agency. She is in her 50s and feels her current gig may be her last. But she is OK with that. She hates office politics. She actually wants to retire and do freelance work from home. With her experience with major ad agencies she could actually do that. I am the crazy man who wants to keep working. I'm like the sled dog who keeps pulling because he wants to see something new around the next corner. Interesting cases. New technology. More interesting work. I will probably die at my desk. Hopefully around age 100.

I have a cousin over 60 who keeps starting and running new successful businesses. His latest is cremating pets and putting them in wood boxes. He gets his referrals from his son who is a vet and every other vet in the area. The rural area where he lives has no other business doing this. He has also done real estate, printing and construction. He was forcibly retired from a C Level Fortune 500 job more 20 years ago. He never worked for a big company ever again. He drives around in a pusher motorhome that I couldn't even afford to put gas in and he is probably worth more than a million dollars.

You are absolutely right.  If I claimed everyone over 55 I was wrong. There are always exceptions.    However I will stand behind what I said as an overall trend.  It's extremely unusual to be hired past 55.  
   I should point out my wife did it and she is making the most money in her life.  
     Was it rough? Absolutely .    However she's in IT and works from home. Away from office politics. 
     

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

Thank you.   I'm working on a Jaguar now for the 2000 challenge. Actually I've got two guys with me and they will bring it down.  It's different this time, more fun because I'm not alone.   

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to frenchyd :

....You should start a thread detailing your racing experience and sharing some of your stories, I'm sure a lot of people would be interested. Probably make a good magazine article. 

I support this idea

Hiring over 55 depends on the industry.  In the consulting engineering world, we hire folks over 55 all the time.  Engineers and designers who can do what we do are few and far between.

pheller said:

93EXCivic said:

In reply to pheller :

Maybe it is because I am friends with a bunch of engineers but none of my friends or myself fit into any of those groups.

I'm curious then - do you manage people without using any of your previous non-management skills or experiences? 

Or are you a supervisor who really doesn't manage anyone, but is more of a team lead? If you're this, you are in the 2nd group. 

If you're lucky enough not to manage anyone, but still make enough money to feel successful, then congrats! 

I think my point was - the vast majority of the economy is made up of people who aren't Mid or Upper - Management, and haven't seen a real wage increase in ages. Most people who work for themselves (trades) make decent money, but will be burnt out with it later in life.

I don't manage anyone and same with mnay of my friends and we are all fairly successful (ie own our own houses, have little to no debt other then mortgages, starting families, have investments and able to persue hobbies). I think there are certainly people out there that make a comfortable living without managing people.

But yeah I don't disagree that most people haven't seen a wage increase that even keeps up with inflation in ages.

There seems like a bucket between the mid and upper example. I feel like I am solidly stuck there  or maybe I am upper but don't feel like it. My work product is executed through the work of others, I set goals, strategy direction, constraints, etc. I think it also depends on what you define as "technical skills" vs "leadership skills" but that second one is increasing importance and the "technical skills" are likely more broad like understanding finance, manufacturing, product all at a high level rather than being an in the details technical expert. Glad I don't have direct people leadership responsiblities, seems like it can be very not fun. 

Agreed on the last point above. I see certain people being able to pace past it easily, and others are falling behind fast.

I think that's what bothers me a bit. 

There can only be so many CEOs and Managers. You can't say "well, people should just move up the chain and get paid better." That doesn't really work, because for every CEO or upper management positions they have 10 directors, and for every 10 directors they've got 50 supervisors, and for every 50 supervisors you've got 1000 non management employees. 

It's just not possible for all those non management employees to become managers or CEOs. 

"They should switch industries to something that pays better." 

Lets look at nursing: nursing still pays really damn good, but even nurses are struggling to get pay raises in areas where they can't find staff. They just can't seem to break the "I'm not interested unless you pay me more" nut. And these are supposedly non-profit health systems. We need nurses, they provide pretty obvious value. When I talk with friends who are Doctors, they often say they are very happy with their pay. Many Doctors don't seek out advanced positions to get a higher salary, they seek out those advanced positions to better tailor work/life and just have more pleasant work day. I planted trees once with a former physician. Super nice guy. Said he had retired in his mid-50's because he didn't need the money and he wanted more free time to do interesting things...like plant trees. 

Why can't the rest of the economy mirror that mentality? At a certain wage (relative to cost of living) - you're good. 

I've got a family friend who works for a large company most of us interact with multiple times a day. He's high up the food chain, like 2nd tier down on the org chart. He makes good money, but not professional athlete, Startup owner, celebrity kind of money. I asked him once why he thought large companies like his couldn't pay every employee a living wage. He said "because our competitors don't." I said "would you advocate for that if say, it made no impact on the earnings and stock value of the company?" He said "it's gotta come from somewhere. My paycheck, your paycheck, stockholders paycheck. Eventually you'll find someone who doesn't want to give up that salary. Someone who is saving for their kids education. Someone is saving for their retirement home. Someone who wants to end Homelessness or feed kids in Africa. Everyone has their reasons to keep that money for themselves." 

It was an enlightening take, for sure. 

In reply to pheller :

I think it's a much less interesting take when you take a critical look at the question and the answer. The reason people don't get paid a living wage is because big businesses are a de facto part of the government. There's no incentive to pay more because there's no law requiring it. The businesses hold a disproportionately large power in wage negotiations, contrary to protestations of the invisible hand disciples. This is by design.

At a certain point beyond the amount of money needed provide safety and comfort you reach greed. It's much easier to handwave this away with education (which is code for perpetuating the gulf between the top and everyone else), the retirement home (is this supposed to resonate with anyone?), but the last one is hilariously tone deaf. I think my employees deserve to financially struggle, despite working hard, so I can pretend to be Jesus in Africa once every few years.

The implication is that these things are things only a few deserve to desire, right? And your friend is implying that his employees should not want or need to save for their children's education, or for a retirement home, or to feed themselves, wait, kids in Africa.

In reply to AaronT :

You are correct. But just stating it like it isn't easily solved. 
     Unions

    They raised wages high enough so a working father could send his children to college, provide a decent living, and an 8 hour work day, leaving much of the of the rest of the day  for rest and time with the family. 
  Today to achieve that requires 2&3 jobs and no time with the family. 
     

Yep. I didn't really buy it, either. He's a nice guy, but his views on a few things are...not agreeable to me. But I liked hearing his viewpoint because of his position in one of the largest companies in the world.  I will say this much - his company does pay good wages and his salary isn't like "omg you're super rich and keeping all the profits for yourself", but I think we were discussing Walmart or something similar. Basically the idea of "why don't successful companies share more profit with labor?"

pheller said:

I think that's what bothers me a bit. 

 

There can only be so many CEOs and Managers. You can't say "well, people should just move up the chain and get paid better." That doesn't really work, because for every CEO or upper management positions they have 10 directors, and for every 10 directors they've got 50 supervisors, and for every 50 supervisors you've got 1000 non management employees. 

It's just not possible for all those non management employees to become managers or CEOs. 

"They should switch industries to something that pays better." 

Lets look at nursing: nursing still pays really damn good, but even nurses are struggling to get pay raises in areas where they can't find staff. They just can't seem to break the "I'm not interested unless you pay me more" nut. And these are supposedly non-profit health systems. We need nurses, they provide pretty obvious value. When I talk with friends who are Doctors, they often say they are very happy with their pay. Many Doctors don't seek out advanced positions to get a higher salary, they seek out those advanced positions to better tailor work/life and just have more pleasant work day. I planted trees once with a former physician. Super nice guy. Said he had retired in his mid-50's because he didn't need the money and he wanted more free time to do interesting things...like plant trees. 

Why can't the rest of the economy mirror that mentality? At a certain wage (relative to cost of living) - you're good. 

I've got a family friend who works for a large company most of us interact with multiple times a day. He's high up the food chain, like 2nd tier down on the org chart. He makes good money, but not professional athlete, Startup owner, celebrity kind of money. I asked him once why he thought large companies like his couldn't pay every employee a living wage. He said "because our competitors don't." I said "would you advocate for that if say, it made no impact on the earnings and stock value of the company?" He said "it's gotta come from somewhere. My paycheck, your paycheck, stockholders paycheck. Eventually you'll find someone who doesn't want to give up that salary. Someone who is saving for their kids education. Someone is saving for their retirement home. Someone who wants to end Homelessness or feed kids in Africa. Everyone has their reasons to keep that money for themselves." 

It was an enlightening take, for sure. 

Employees have to take power back. Individually they have no power to command a fair salary. 
 With unions. They can achieve everything their grandparents had.  
 This rugged individual nonsense is what makes us poor.   There are 8 billion rugged individuals trying to scratch out a living.  United they stand divided they fail. 

frenchyd said:

In reply to AaronT :

You are correct. But just stating it like it isn't easily solved. 
     Unions

    They raised wages high enough so a working father could send his children to college, provide a decent living, and an 8 hour work day, leaving much of the of the rest of the day  for rest and time with the family. 
  Today to achieve that requires 2&3 jobs and no time with the family. 
     

At the last company I worked for, the northern states were unionized. The southern states were not. The northern guys were making the union wage of $15 to $18 an hour while living in a more expensive area and having to pay the union for the privilege of being underpaid. Since I was negotiating for myself, I was making $22 an hour and got to keep everything the government didn't steal. Needless to say, the union guys were some kind of pissed off about that. 

If you have some group or bureaucrat setting your wage, then that is all you will make. It won't matter if you do a better job or a worse job, that's your pay. There is no incentive to be a better employee, manager, or business. 

If you are setting your wage, then the limit is only what the market will bear. 

You can keep your unions. 

In reply to Toyman! :

Are unions perfect, no more than any group of people. But the rugged individual is getting stomped on. There is no law that says a company has to be fair in the distribution of profits.  So the ones at the top keep most for themselves. 
   Unions are the balancing force to the power of management.  
     Compare the living wages paid when nearly 1/2 the country belonged to unions to today when less than 12% of the workers belong to unions. 
   The rich were rich and the working stuff had to work. That's not going away.   It simply will be slightly more fair.