4 ms·
While I get your point, the stat is completely sufficient. Point being serious under compensation. Everything reinforcing that is good, and gravy.
by ddingus 5y ago
While I get your point, the stat is completely sufficient.
Point being serious under compensation.
Everything reinforcing that is good, and gravy.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoSome might think a national average of $81k in annual income is not under compensation considering the median income by state ranges from $50k to $90k. I would be unable to compare one’s income to another without knowing all the other details I listed at a minimum. As a side note, I will start believing the balance between purchasers of labor and sellers of labor will have been achieved when purchasers of labor have to start advertising minimum pay per unit of time and advertise consistent work schedules.
- ddingus 5y agoGiven the majority is paycheck to paycheck, many and myself included see under compensation as a chronic problem the result of economic policy building it to the point we see today.[1] Those details are unnecessary at these income levels. Basic cost and risk exposure most people face are enough to understand sums in that range. [1] The implied promise was it being far less expensive to live and work. That simply did not happen, and that failure defines the problem in my view, just to be clear.
- majou 5y agoWhere I live all nurses work overtime; I imagine that inflates the number quite a bit while taking a huge toll.
- ddingus 5y agoYup. Agreed. And now, sustained, not optional OT.