According to the latest numbers from the BLS, here are the cities where pay has increased the most over the past year:
Both the biggest and smallest pay increases seem to be scattered pretty equally around the country, so no interesting conclusions about this spring to mind. I will say that only in the yellow cities has pay even come close to keeping up with inflation. Every other city has seen a net pay decrease, and the red cities have seen a massive pay decrease.
I really wish that BLS offered a map like this with pay adjusted for inflation. They don't do this, however, so I added a second legend that at least gives you an idea using the national inflation number. It's likely that nearly every single metro area in the United States has seen a net pay decrease.
Salaries not keeping up with inflation...
plus...
Spending down of stimulus savings....
plus....
Loss of child-tax-credits....
People raising families will really feel that latter one. Republicans have shifted focus to the top one so not to get blamed for their policies.
At least the school lunch programs have been extended.
Yellow dot along the MN/ND border is Fargo in Cass county. An 8.5% QOL cola was adopted last month for county employees. The formula has traditionally been tried to CPI year over year for comparable cities in the region. Last year's figure was 5.1%. The county comissioners unanimously supported it. There is also a slight increase in actual pay some years.
Obviously this is just the public sector but it does partially explain the dot. Keeping up with inflation.
That is the most bizarre color scale I have ever seen. Someone needs to take a lesson from Cynthia Brewer: (colorbrewer.org - it appears that I can no longer post a link)
Kevin switch the top spot to bright yellow.
I'm sure feeling the "not keeping up with inflation" part!
Where did Kevin get this chart? I clicked on the link but didn't see any resource corresponding to his map.
Good question. Looks like:
Over-the-year percent change in total private average weekly earnings for metropolitan areas, not seasonally adjusted
Chart, though with different colors.
That was under the "News release charts"
https://www.bls.gov/charts/metro-area-employment-and-unemployment/metro-area-oty-percent-change-in-average-weekly-earnings.htm
Thank you.
This is the way:
https://www.bls.gov/charts/metro-area-employment-and-unemployment/metro-area-oty-percent-change-in-average-weekly-earnings.htm
Thank you.
You should have kept the BLS color scheme. The yellow creates a disjointed flow of interpretation of the map.
Highlights that fact that the best and worst areas are right by each other.
Unfortunately, doesn't indicate the relative population of the areas.
And yet in the western tradition, yellow does not represent "best". Thus, disjointed flow of interpretation.
The largest employer for MOST states are the government employers as a whole. State, county, municipal and of course federal.
ALL are dealing with labor shortages - all are offering huge increases in pay to retain emergency first responders and the lower paying jobs. City of Wilmington NC has given police, fire, rescue, 911 employees large increases in pay in the last 90 days. Other cities across NC are doing likewise.
The "problem" with government employment is that it IS low paying compared to private employers. The benefits, healthcare, and retirement pensions are very good but in high inflation times? and in times of labor shortages private employers offer much higher pay which would coax many out of the government jobs because their needs are short term, so the pension loses it's luster.
Funny thing is that we USED to believe that 4.5% to 5% unemployment was considered "Full employment". What we figured was 3% of the population unable, unwilling or too old to work. The other 1.5% - 2% was transitioning INTO that group.
We are far below that range now and coupled with COVID our pool of available workers has diminished to a point where hiring is becoming very competitive and inflation is making retention more competitive.
I can't remember, or have read about, a similar time in our last century that had these facets altogether.
It's hard to square these 'everybody is falling behind because of inflation' narratives with the fact that bank account cash balances are higher than they have ever been across all income levels.
These gloomy narratives are better click bait.....but they certainly seem to be missing something.
The Fed reports that the cash balances of the bottom half (by wealth) have increased by 45% over the last 2 years. Assets are higher, liabilities are lower, overall wealth has skyrocketed.
But the INFLATION!!!! ???
Cash balances were up because the government gave every adult $3,200 for free, and an additional $2,500 per child. People (including my family) are now burning through that money because prices are going nuts. Just saw that if we calculated inflation today the same way we did in 1980, the inflation rate would be 16%.
Re: Just saw that if we calculated inflation today the same way we did in 1980, the inflation rate would be 16%.
Which is probably nonsense put about by the tin-foil hat Right who of course want to inflate (hey) a problem into an utter catastrophe.
How is people moving accounted for in this? If a bunch of high paid, remote workers move to a city will it look like the city had a big gain when the original residents didn't really see much?