Eh, I'm not terribly persuaded by that line of reasoning: the article CW links to^1 mentions that the IT field operates at full employment. At 3.7% unemployment

Eh, I'm not terribly persuaded by that line of reasoning: the article CW links to^1 mentions that the IT field operates at full employment. At 3.7% unemployment you have a huge amount of bargaining power. As you alluded above, I too think the statistic presented mostly captures IT workers 'proper': server administrators and support people. But as a support function, they've basically stopped having major gains in productivity in like 1998. We're not like them. We're princes of the universe who own the means of our production. Instead, I think it's more along the lines of 1) a lot of wealth increase has been captured by the higher skilled workers (some with cause, some without) and, of course, equity owners 2) but mostly, average wealth economy wide has been stagnant for everyone in all jobs except non-executives/equity owners. You can make six figures before you're thirty. No problem. It's very common within my social milieu. -- 1. Obviously a white paper designed to help lobby against increased immigration quotas. As an incumbent, this benefits me but the initial claim that 3.7% unemployment doesn't constitute full-employment is so spurious that it's hard to take any of the rest of it seriously.