Ok, maybe I'm looking at this funny, but this just doesn't seem right.
From the article...
"In 2005, real hourly wages were nearly 2 percent higher than in 2000, compared with the 1.1 percent rise in wages between 1990 and 1995. Wages are increasing at a rate that's more than 1 1/2 times faster than that of the early '90s, and the average amount of total compensation in 2005 was 7 percent higher than in 2000."
Think about this for a minute. Hourly wages rose 2% over 5 years?! That is supposed to be good?! I would, except that I compare it to other income.
This is, after all, 'hourly wages'. How about the income of people with money to invest? If they aren't bringing in over 10%, they believe something is wrong. This is people with money just sitting there bringing in more money, not taking into consideration earnings from actually doing something.
Those meager 'earnings' of 10% has to come from somewhere, these people don't just squat and it comes out their ass. SOMETHING has to be done to produce such growth, some kind of LABOR. There people doing the actual labor, those whose earnings rose 2% in 5 years.
I know, these hourly wage earners could sock money away and invest it. First, a lot of these people are living on the edge as it is, and honestly can't afford to. Second, those that maybe could scrimp and save, are spending it on stupid shit just to get a small piece of this wonderful pie everyone is raving about. You know the lifestyle I'm talking about, it's all over the media. You aren't 'cool' unless you spent your money on the Ipod. Narurally it puts them on the edge as well. Our society is geared toward separating money from the 'foolish' working stiffs. This is commendable because they are fools, based on the old addage 'a fool and his money...'
No comments:
Post a Comment