Future jobs won’t support decent living standard: Report

[iwishiwas]

I think we knew this without a study---we just have to look at our own lives-our neighbors or fiends families. We see this happening all around us.



New Report at:

http://www.wowonline.org/usbest/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110401/ts_yblog_thelookout/future-jobs-wont-support-decent-living-standard-report

Fri Apr 1, 1:09 pm ET
Future jobs won’t support decent living standard: Report
By Zachary Roth zachary Roth – Fri Apr 1, 1:09 pm ET......................

The study, commissioned by the nonprofit group Wider Opportunities for Women, looks at how much income it takes to support a basic standard of living for an American family--and finds that many of the jobs of the future won't pay enough to provide that.

To calculate this "economic security" income, the study's authors certainly didn't assume a lavish lifestyle. They considered basic needs--housing, food, utilities, health care, child-care, and transportation--plus the cost of modest saving for retirement and a small surplus for emergencies. (At at a time when economic "shocks" are increasingly common, that's an essential part of financial security.) They don't factor in some things many of us take for granted, like entertainment or eating out.

The result? To achieve economic security, a single parent with two children needs an income of just over $30,000 a year--nearly twice the federal minimum wage--while a two-income household needs almost $68,000.

The study then finds that, according to Labor Department projections, fewer than 13 percent of jobs to be created by 2018 will meet the economic security threshold for a single parent with two kids. Forty-three percent of those jobs will meet the threshold for a two-income household.
...................

[midnight]

1. Time to overhaul the message..... Raise income levels and no more

nonsense about bankers needing salaries that overshadow their contribution to this country......

[Quantess]

2. No matter how redundant the "news", it still bears repeating.

[Skink]

3. What do you mean by future jobs?

we are here now.

[iwishiwas]

11. Yes, the future is NOW.

[progressoid]

20. No shit.

I make less and less every year.

I can't bear to think about what the future will bring.

[Mimosa]

4. Important information. n/t

[ixion]

5. the by-products of so-called 'free trade' agreements

:grr:

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. Replace "by-product" with "purpose" and you got it. n/t

[ixion]

14. fair enough...

[Hugabear]

6. Incomes are going down, while prices are going up

The system won't be able to sustain itself for too much longer. This isn't going to have a very pleasant ending. When you have the rich elites basically saying "let them eat cake", well we know how that turned out the last time. The guillotine may be gone, but we still have the blueprints... :mad:

[PeaceNikki]

7. Be sure to read Ken Layne's summary of this at the war blog Wonkette

http://wonkette.com/442001/welcome-to-poverty-everyone-you-need-household-income-of-68k-to-live

Have you been laboring under the delusion that you’re still part of the tiny, rapidly vanishing Middle Class? Happy April Fools Day! A new study proves that a family of four needs $67,920 a year (pre-tax) to survive in America. And that’s basic: no vacations, no fancy dinners, no wine tastings, no fun-box deliveries from Amazon or Zappos or whatever every couple of months to break up the crushing monotony of work and eventual death. You will, however, spend an average of $12,000 a year on car insurance and payments on your crappy mid-sized sedan, because we don’t have much in the way of public transportation in this country. And you’ll spend another $12,000 a year on child care, because we don’t like to provide socialism in these parts, ha ha. Freedom isn’t free, after all.

Not much left after $12,000 a year in rent and utilities, either. Don’t forget to pay $9,000 in taxes on that $67,920! Who do you think you are, General Electric?

The median household income in the United States is $52,029 — nearly $16,000 shy of what it actually costs to keep your head above water if you’ve got a two-income two-child household.

...

If you’re in the top 20% of income earners in this country, you’re doing better with $180,000 in annual income — but not so much better that you feel especially comfortable, and you’re relatively free from the danger of being “rich.” We reserve that special category for the 1% who control 70% of the wealth in this country and have household incomes above $400,000. (And because it’s a day of such mirth and fun, we will not even type the household income levels for the top tenth of a percent.)

[Newest Reality]

8. Future?

The present is already fulfilling that expectation. Paycheck-to-paycheck, and lower, means no security whatsoever.

The statistics show that wages have stagnated over several decades and consumer debt, (we'll loan to you what you need to make-up for what you are not payed) was what largely fueled the now nearly defunct, consumer economy via credit cards and equity loans.

This culture is not about the security of consumers. There is profit to be made on the uptick and more to be made on the downfall. Profit is job one. It transcends all other social and ethical issues and it is all, as business says, about the bottom-line.

Multinationals have greener pastures to exploit and can still make some good bucks on struggling, falling citizens, a.k.a., consumers, (a term which transformed us from citizens to livestock-like commodities/resources).

Ready for the new way? The old one is not coming back again. Big changes are in store for most of us.

[aquart]

9. Oh, look. Someone who thinks the world didn't change today.

But it did.

[dkf]

10. Why would a single parent need $30,000 and a two earner family need $68,000?

That makes no sense.

[spinbaby]

12. Expense of a second adult

The second adult needs food, clothing, transportation to work, etc.

[Sisaruus]

15. still doesn't make sense...

The 4th person needs 126% more than the other 3 people combined?

[I Drink Water]

16. I was thinking the same thing. It probably explains it in the pdf report, but

I can't open pdfs on this cpu.

[pitohui]

17. intelligent people who can do math don't have 2 kids, because they don't need a study 2 know this

girls/women who still can't do math and it's the 21st century and they still have 2 or more children w/out a man...at some point you lose my sympathy, i am going to be most sympathetic to people who are actually trying to help themselves

yes, jobs don't pay enough to live on, and really they NEVER have for most women, so stop being an idiot already and stop popping out babies

it is a disgrace that work doesn't pay but some of these women create their own troubles

completely idiotic to have a child on your own knowing, going in, that you'll be paying out $12k a year for child care, basically baby sitting services

nothing will change as long as the stupid people continue to breed and produce children AND LOSE MONEY ON THEIR HARD WORK OF PRODUCING THE NEXT GENERATION

[Mimosa]

18. Only the wealthy should reproduce? We understand... n/t

[w8liftinglady]

19. Texas single parents have a general income of 1600/mo

and they better be grateful to have it.
The longer I live here,the more I despise these individuals who work these folks like slaves,literally.
instead of beating,they just fire them...much worse when trying to get a new job.