]The graph above is from FRED, the St. Louis Federal Reserve. It illustrates the total civilian employment and the subsectors that have been responsible for most of the growth in employment over the last decade or so: leisure and hospitality, government, retail, and construction. I omitted the last fast-growing sector because FRED doesn’t include it in a straightforward way: healthcare services.
BTW, in each of those sectors the growth has tended to come among the lowest paid. Take construction, for example. When we say “employment is growing” we don’t mean that the number of master plumbers, electricians, carpenters, etc. is growing but that the number of workers paid at or below minimum wage is growing. When considered in that light it isn’t particularly surprising that wages have been stagnating for decades.
No particular point to all of this. I just wanted to have a record of what I’ve been thinking about.
For workers, and even middle class people, peak USA was 1965.
Wealth is produced by mining, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and manufacturing (including construction). Services and financials merely redistribute existing wealth. One reason that wages have been stagnating is that total wealth production has been stagnating or even declining.
As I noted elsewhere health care spending has been essentially flat as a percentage of GDP for 10-12 years. However, there is a lot of hangover from Covid, especially with nurses. I think their pay will continue to rise for a while.
Steve
As I noted elsewhere health are spending as a proportion of GDP is next to meaningless when the growth in the non-healthcare is increasing rapidly. Healthcare spending overall or per capita is rising rapidly.
That’s called “primary production”. I have been arguing for more primary production for decades. What has happened instead has been increased financialization of the economy.
bob sykes: Wealth is produced by mining, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and manufacturing (including construction).
Murder mysteries are major British export. Indeed, people will work in mining, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and manufacturing to pay for the latest British murder mystery. That’s wealth.
bob sykes: Services and financials merely redistribute existing wealth.
So much for capitalism, which is merely “redistributing” wealth.
“meaningless when the growth in the non-healthcare is increasing rapidly. ”
So you think GDP has grown rapidly over the last 10-12 years? (I knew you were a secret Obama fan.)
Steve
Again, healthcare spending is not flat or declining whether reckoned in dollars or per capita. It’s rising rapidly.
Zachriel
“That’s wealth”
No, that’s entertainment. And if your teenagers spend the mortgage money on a Taylor Swift concert, that’s robbery spent on entertainment. Same thing if dad spends it at the racetrack.
Hey, he had a good time, right?
Greyshambler: No, that’s entertainment.
You have a very strange notion of wealth.
If an ancient troubadour sings for his supper, that’s wealth in his belly. If an ancient lord feeds the troubadour to enhance his reputation and bring allies to his side, that’s power and wealth. If the successful miner, farmer, logger, fisher trade their gold for song, then the troubadour has gold in his pocket. That’s wealth. He can spend it on food or fineries, or save it as a store of wealth.
Are you really claiming Taylor Swift isn’t wealthy? Seriously? Are you arguing that only if Taylor Swift converts her money into gold that she is really wealthy? Or does she have to convert it into fish?
Here’s an experiment:
Does this look like wealth?
How about this?
Finally, does this look like wealth?