Generally speaking wages have climbed slower than the cost of living for most Americans for some decades now. Productivity and profits are up, but those aren't being shared with the people who create them.
I see. So you have no idea how a free market works.
Without government support when farmers produce as much as they can, they produce a glut which forces their prices to drop and they lose money. Without a coordinated response their individual responses are to grow more further depressing prices. This can lead to overfarming and catastrophe if the weather adds further stress.
See also the farm crisis that proceeded the Oklahoma dust bowl and how that was partly responsible for the dust bowl. See also that due to government interference there has been no such crisis since then anywhere in the US. Or anywhere where the government interferes with agriculture. However in libertarian paradise like parts of Africa famines are a regular occurence.
A few highlights about minimum wage workers from the BLS:
Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less. Among employed teenagers paid by the hour, about 21 percent earned the minimum wage or less, compared with about 3 percent of workers age 25 and over. (See table 1 and table 7.)
In 2012, 6 percent of women paid hourly rates had wages at or below the prevailing federal minimum, compared with about 3 percent of men. (See table 1.)
About 5 percent of White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino hourly paid workers earned the federal minimum wage or less. Among Asian workers paid at hourly rates, about 3 percent earned the minimum wage or less. (See table 1.)
Among hourly paid workers age 16 and over, about 10 percent of those who had less than a high school diploma earned the federal minimum wage or less, compared with about 4 percent of those who had a high school diploma (with no college) and about 2 percent of college graduates. (See table 6.)
Never-married workers, who tend to be young, were more likely than married workers to earn the federal minimum wage or less (about 8 percent versus about 2 percent). (See table 8.)
About 11 percent of part-time workers (persons who usually work less than 35 hours per week) were paid the federal minimum wage or less, compared with about 2 percent of full-time workers. (See table 1 and table 9.)
By major occupational group, the highest proportion of hourly paid workers earning at or below the federal minimum wage was in service occupations, at about 12 percent. About three-fifths of workers earning the minimum wage or less in 2012 were employed in service occupations, mostly in food preparation and serving related jobs. (See table 4.)
The industry with the highest proportion of workers with hourly wages at or below the federal minimum wage was leisure and hospitality (about 19 percent). About half of all workers paid at or below the federal minimum wage were employed in this industry, the vast majority in restaurants and other food services. For many of these workers, tips and commissions supplement the hourly wages received. (See table 5.)
The states with the highest proportions of hourly paid workers earning at or below the federal minimum wage were Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and Idaho (all between 7 and 8 percent). The states with the lowest percentages of hourly paid workers earning at or below the federal minimum wage were Alaska, Oregon, California, Montana, and Washington (all under 2 percent). It should be noted that some states have minimum wage laws establishing standards that exceed the federal minimum wage. (See table 2 and table 3.)
A properly working free market drives farmers and ranchers into periodic cycles of bankrupcy. That's why we have price supports and a variety of other ag subsidies.
Whether that matters to you depends a lot on how you feel about family-owned agriculture and monopoly, and how deeply you are in either ideological tank. And there is an endless supply of argument and confounding argument about all of it.
Right you are.
This data goes back to 2011. During the current recession, the building trades got hit pretty hard. Engineering is less cyclical.
One big dip was after the Soviet Union died: The engineering trade rags were full of doom-and-gloom, and letters from people emigrating to Australia (which at the time had an open immigration policy for high-skill people). The nationwide engineering unemployment rate had quadrupled! -- it went from about 1% to about 4%.
To fill out the picture, it's useful to also know the number of people in the various job categories. For instance, there has to be a factor of ten more electricians than electrical engineers.
Joe Gwinn
That's data reported in Jan. 2013, from employment figures for 2012.
During any recession, building trades are almost ALWAYS hit hard. They are highly unstable jobs, depending a great deal on home sales and business building investment rates -- which swing like a yo-yo.
Engineering and related jobs are much more stable than building trades, but anything related to manufacturing is also vulnerable to rates of consumer sales.
That's easy to determine, Joe. The Bureau of Labor Statistics produces vast amounts of data, which I've used in my research for close to 40 years.
And when the prices drop, farmers go into other products. I have more confidence in the American free market, than I do in socialized command economies.
As to Africa, isn't that the place where the skinnies on jeeps with AK-47 steal relief supplies at gunpoint? And where tribes use famine as a weapon of war?
. Christ> >
I'm glad you don't let mere facts embarass political theory.
I'm glad you're a socialist.
. Christ> >
They live from year to year on loans. When prices drop or when crops fail, a percentage of them sell out. That's how the big ag corporations grow.
Or not. In 1992, non-operators owned 29% of the ag land in the US. Today, thanks to good prices and subsidies, that percentage has dropped.
I'm not judging good or bad here. I'll leave that for people who have time on their hands and who like to speculate about their economic theories. But those are the facts. Before recent crop success and supported prices, ag land was consolidating in ag corporations, who tend to be oligopolistic and who have nasty habits.
True. There hasn't been an example since the 1930s, when we last had a free market in agriculture. Collect your data from before then and try to prove your point.
You can't.
Correction: It was 37% in 1992, and 29% in 2007. There is a higher percentage of owner-operators (smallish farmers) today than there was in 1992, reversing the earlier trend toward consolidation.
"The River" just proved how vulnerable small farmers were. So did "Country."
"Friday, October 5"
"And off to Camp David where we saw Jessica Lange's movie, 'Country' which was a blatant propaganda message against out Agri. programs." -- Ronald Reagan, _The Reagan Diaries_, 1984
Most probably are not good businessmen, but competition drove small farmers into a pattern of vulnerability. One big downturn, of crops or the economy, and many of them are toast.
Go back to Free Silver and see what was happening then. What you won't find is much data -- certainly not enough to support your point.
Again, before you start your usual bullshit, I'm not saying it's good or bad. In some ways, big corporate ag owners are more efficient. In other ways, they're not. Take your pick.
======================
While this scans well, history does not support this viewpoint.
For any society/culture to be reasonably/minimally stable, the basics [food, shelter, clothing, and physical security] must be available to almost the entire population. Some recent and current examples are Somalia, Rwanda, Sudan, and currently the so-called Arab Spring and several Latin American countries, which in the final analysis have far more to do with the failure of the national leadership, both governmental and private, to insure adequate amounts of ==>affordable
=================================================================
NOT INTERESTED IN CANADA, THANKS. . . .
=================================================================
=================================================================
NOT INTERESTED IN CANADA, THANKS. . . .
=================================================================
=================================================================
NOT INTERESTED IN CANADA, THANKS. . . .
=================================================================
As you once again express your frustration with reality with an incoherent racist ranting.
One of the primary functions of any government is to guarantee the necessities of life. A government which fails to do so is overwhelmed by the chaos of its members, and a new government is created. One of the unique features of a government is its ability to force obedience, and governments will use compulsion if necessary to secure and distribute food, water, and anything else its society decides are necessities.
=================================================================
NOT INTERESTED IN CANADA, THANKS. . . .
=================================================================
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.