Trump's first month of job creation misses estimates

Nah.... I don't buy into that theoretical utopian economic ideal. The libertarian mantra of laissez-faire capitalism is based on a flawed set of assumptions aimed at achieving a specific behavioural model - effectivley an unrealistic modelling of society which even Coarse couldn't get his head round.
We can agree to disagree but I will note that government seldom permits free markets so it's easy to see trouble in them.
 
Werbung:
errmm.... no it wasn't. I'd be interested to know how you came to that assumption.
I didn't come up with it. Read an interesting article years ago about it jist was how regulation forced wall street to get smarter. Idea being that up through well into the 1900s securities was a very basic business. I'll see if I can find it.
 
First of all the poor figures in the last moth reflex more om Obama than Trump. He has not had time to introduce economic reforms. But there is a problem with low wage growth . Real GDP in 216 increased by 1.9% much higher than wages. This was caused PCE , Residential Fixed revenue State and,local and Federal government spending (Bureau of Economic Analysis)
I don't agree with classical theory if GDP,and profits rise so will wages. If need government intervention
I am not sure why people are living in tents in Silicon Valley there are plenty of empty buildings there.
 
First of all the poor figures in the last moth reflex more om Obama than Trump. He has not had time to introduce economic reforms. But there is a problem with low wage growth . Real GDP in 216 increased by 1.9% much higher than wages. This was caused PCE , Residential Fixed revenue State and,local and Federal government spending (Bureau of Economic Analysis)
I don't agree with classical theory if GDP,and profits rise so will wages. If need government intervention
I am not sure why people are living in tents in Silicon Valley there are plenty of empty buildings there.
because they cant afford it. cost of living is through the roof.
 
CEO salaries are going up, or could it.
There are "discussions" taking place in the UK regarding CEO remuneration packages (salary/benefits/stock options etc.) with a view to regulating them over and above shareholders votes/options etc. It won't get any traction (I assume..) but there has always been the "fat cat" view of exec salaries and brokers bonuses etc. in the papers which tend to whip up feelings.
 
There are "discussions" taking place in the UK regarding CEO remuneration packages (salary/benefits/stock options etc.) with a view to regulating them over and above shareholders votes/options etc. It won't get any traction (I assume..) but there has always been the "fat cat" view of exec salaries and brokers bonuses etc. in the papers which tend to whip up feelings.
The fattest cats are not CEOs
 
Dogtowner.Why are six figure salary people living in tent in Silicon Valley Don't you pay taxes on tents? I have friends in San Jose while rents are high they survive .Both have two jobs. In Silicon Valley there are many empty buildings own by computer companies. This is because most of the low level jobs have been moved to Asia
 
Dogtowner.Why are six figure salary people living in tent in Silicon Valley Don't you pay taxes on tents? I have friends in San Jose while rents are high they survive .Both have two jobs. In Silicon Valley there are many empty buildings own by computer companies. This is because most of the low level jobs have been moved to Asia
The six figure jobs are low level. San Jose does have high cost of living but nothing like the vallley. Tents are not taxed as they don't own the land they are pitched on. It's region wide. The poor are gone from San Fran apart from homeless vagrants and they are working on getting rid of them. Oakland is in danger of being overrun with affluence.
They could not afford offices converted to housing. Sounds crazy but that's how it is.
 
He was one of several tech workers, earning between $100,000 and $700,000 a year, who vented to the Guardian about their financial situation. Almost all of them spoke only on the condition of anonymity, or agreed only to give their first names, fearing retribution by their employers for speaking publicly about their predicament.
The cost of housing is a common complaint among Bay Area techies. Engineers can expect, according to one analysis, to pay between 40% and 50% of their salary renting an apartment near work.
... which is not untypical of a lot of people around the world living cities who choose not to commute further than a few miles to their place of work. A free market.
 
Werbung:
The six figure jobs are low level. San Jose does have high cost of living but nothing like the vallley. Tents are not taxed as they don't own the land they are pitched on. It's region wide. The poor are gone from San Fran apart from homeless vagrants and they are working on getting rid of them. Oakland is in danger of being overrun with affluence.
They could not afford offices converted to housing. Sounds crazy but that's how it is.

What are you calling "the Valley?" San Jose is right in the middle of "The Valley," and although it is slightly less expensive than cities such as Palo Alto, Saratoga, or Los Gatos, San Jose is an integral part of Silicon valley, as is Milpitas! How long have you lived there? How long have you worked in the high tech industry there?

A 1 to 2 bedroom apartment can cost between $2,000 and $3,000 a month. . .but salaries for high tech people (even technicians with under 5 years of experience) are usually above $100,000 and as hight as $150,000! So, the cost of living is high, obviously, but it doesn't take 50% of one's salary to rent an apartment! And those who hire from outside the area (i.e., from Colorado) get a cost of living adjustment and a relocation allowance that allows them to rent relatively close to where they work. Also, a lot of high tech industry allow and even encourages working from home, so the distance to work is not all that important!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top