XPost: or.politics, seattle.politics, ca.politics
XPost: alt.law-enforcement

(Biden's inflation means you need at least $10,000 more just to live
like you did three years ago. But never mind you, we need to rescue
students who made bad choices!)

from https://thehill.com/homenews/nexstar_media_wire/4603485-are-you-still-earning-enough-to-be-middle-class-check-these-new-tables/

Are you still earning enough to be middle class? Check these new tables
BY ADDY BINK - 04/24/24 7:05 AM ET

(NEXSTAR) — It can be hard to tell if you rank as middle class,
especially when it feels like your paycheck doesn’t go as far as it once
did (one government analysis suggests you need at least $10,000 more
just to live like you did three years ago).

A new report from personal finance site SmartAsset reviewed data from
the U.S. Census Bureau as well as the Pew Research Center to determine
what it does take — at least on paper — to be considered middle class in all 50 states and 345 of the nation’s largest cities.

The analysis used the Pew Research definition of “middle income,” which says a middle class salary range is two-thirds to double the area’s
median salary. As of 2022 (the most recent Census data), the average
median household income in the U.S. was $73,914, meaning the national
range for the middle class is roughly $49,271 to $147,828. Across the nation’s largest cities, the range is between $51,558 and $154,590,
according to SmartAsset.

Nowhere was the middle class range as drastic as New Jersey, where
SmartAsset determined the difference between the lower class and upper
class was a whopping $128,468. Your household would need to earn at
least $64,224 to be considered middle class in the Garden State, and
earning more than $192,692 would put you in the upper class.

In addition to New Jersey, you need an annual household salary of at
least $50,000 to be considered middle class in 17 states: Oregon,
Illinois, New York, Rhode Island, Delaware, Minnesota, Virginia, Alaska, Connecticut, Utah, Colorado, New Hampshire, Washington, California,
Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Maryland.

A person considered middle class in New Jersey could easily rank among
the wealthiest in Mississippi, which had the lowest middle class range
on SmartAsset’s list. In the Magnolia State, earning between $35,142 and $105,438 would put you in the middle class.

The interactive table below shows each state’s middle class range based
on SmartAsset’s report.

For best viewing on mobile, turn your device horizontally. Still unable
to view the table? Click here.

Table with 4 columns and 50 rows. Currently displaying rows 1 to 10.
State Lower end Upper end
New Jersey $64,224 $192,692
Maryland $63,321 $189,982
Massachusetts $62,986 $188,976
Hawaii $61,633 $184,916
California $61,028 $183,102
Washington $60,865 $182,612
New Hampshire $59,989 $179,984
Colorado $59,529 $178,604
Utah $59,439 $178,336
Connecticut $58,947 $176,858
Table with 4 columns and 50 rows. Currently displaying rows 11 to 20.
State Lower end Upper end
Alaska $58,741 $176,242
Virginia $57,243 $171,746
Minnesota $54,887 $164,676
Delaware $54,777 $164,348
Rhode Island $54,564 $163,708
New York $53,033 $159,114
Illinois $51,134 $153,416
Oregon $50,433 $151,314
Arizona $49,707 $149,136
Vermont $49,322 $147,982
skip down to
Iowa $46,387 $139,176
Maine $46,357 $139,086
Florida $46,197 $138,606
Kansas $45,945 $137,850
Montana $45,083 $135,262
North Carolina $44,983 $134,962
Michigan $44,653 $133,972
Indiana $44,519 $133,570
Ohio $43,809 $131,440
Tennessee $43,498 $130,508
and the bottom is
Missouri $43,203 $129,622
South Carolina $42,739 $128,230
New Mexico $39,813 $119,452
Alabama $39,779 $119,348
Oklahoma $39,778 $119,346
Kentucky $39,557 $118,682
Arkansas $36,951 $110,864
Louisiana $36,940 $110,832
West Virginia $36,216 $108,658
Mississippi $35,142 $105,438
Table: Addy Bink, NexstarSource: SmartAssetCreated with Datawrapper

While New Jersey had the highest state-level middle class range, none of
its cities ranked among the 10 most expensive cities. Instead,
California cities dominated the upper end of the list.

It was Sunnyvale, a Bay Area city northwest of San Jose, that has the
richest middle class range: you need a household salary of at least
$113,176 to be “middle income.” If you have your sights set for upper
class status in Sunnyvale, SmartAsset determined you would need a salary
of at least $339,562.

In six cities — California’s Sunnyvale, Fremont, San Mateo, and Santa Clara; Bellevue, Washington; and Highlands Ranch, Colorado — you need a household salary of more than $101,000 to be a middle-earner.

A six-figure salary would put you among the upper class in the 10 cities
on the opposite end of SmartAsset’s list. The most affordable city, the report found, was Detroit, where an annual salary of just $24,300 would
make you middle class. Close behind was Cleveland, Ohio, which had a
low-end middle class benchmark of $24,898.

Across the 10 cities with the lowest middle class range, a household
salary of at least $30,000 would be enough to qualify as a middle income earner.

The interactive table below shows the 345 cities SmartAsset analyzed, as
well as the lower and upper bounds of their middle class.

For best viewing on mobile, turn your device horizontally. Still unable
to view the table? Click here.


You can view SmartAsset’s full report here.

Though it has tumbled from a peak of 9.1% in the summer of 2022,
inflation has remained elevated so far this year. Prices excluding
volatile food and energy costs rose 3.8% in March from a year earlier,
the same as in the previous month and well above the Federal Reserve’s target. On Thursday, the Labor Department reported that the four-week
average number of Americans filing for jobless benefits has remained
unchanged, defying efforts by the Fed to cool hiring.

‘Cicada-geddon’: Which states will soon be bombarded with cicadas?
Last week, in an exclusive interview with Nexstar, the parent company of
this outlet, President Joe Biden admitted inflation is being “stubborn
and not going down to 2%.” He further called our economy “the strongest…of any country in the world,” but adding, “we’ve got more to do.”

“We’ve created over 15 million new jobs. And the salaries are outpacing
the cost of inflation. Lot of good happening,” he added. “But still,
it’s those small things that matter in a big way to ordinary people. And that’s what we have to work on.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

TAGS JOE BIDEN
Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

SHARE
POST

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.law-enforcement, ca.politics, or.politics
XPost: seattle.politics

On 24 Apr 2024, a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> posted some news:V5bWN.65783$cMe1.13512@fx10.iad:

(Biden's inflation means you need at least $10,000 more just to live
like you did three years ago. But never mind you, we need to rescue
students who made bad choices!)

from
https://thehill.com/homenews/nexstar_media_wire/4603485-are-you-still-e arning-enough-to-be-middle-class-check-these-new-tables/

Are you still earning enough to be middle class? Check these new
tables BY ADDY BINK - 04/24/24 7:05 AM ET

(NEXSTAR) — It can be hard to tell if you rank as middle class,
especially when it feels like your paycheck doesn’t go as far as it
once did (one government analysis suggests you need at least $10,000
more just to live like you did three years ago).

A new report from personal finance site SmartAsset reviewed data from
the U.S. Census Bureau as well as the Pew Research Center to determine
what it does take — at least on paper — to be considered middle
class in all 50 states and 345 of the nation’s largest cities.

The analysis used the Pew Research definition of “middle income,”
which says a middle class salary range is two-thirds to double the
area’s median salary. As of 2022 (the most recent Census data), the
average median household income in the U.S. was $73,914, meaning the
national range for the middle class is roughly $49,271 to $147,828.
Across the nation’s largest cities, the range is between $51,558 and $154,590, according to SmartAsset.

Nowhere was the middle class range as drastic as New Jersey, where
SmartAsset determined the difference between the lower class and upper
class was a whopping $128,468. Your household would need to earn at
least $64,224 to be considered middle class in the Garden State, and
earning more than $192,692 would put you in the upper class.

In addition to New Jersey, you need an annual household salary of at
least $50,000 to be considered middle class in 17 states: Oregon,
Illinois, New York, Rhode Island, Delaware, Minnesota, Virginia,
Alaska, Connecticut, Utah, Colorado, New Hampshire, Washington,
California, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Maryland.

A person considered middle class in New Jersey could easily rank among
the wealthiest in Mississippi, which had the lowest middle class range
on SmartAsset’s list. In the Magnolia State, earning between $35,142
and $105,438 would put you in the middle class.

The interactive table below shows each state’s middle class range
based on SmartAsset’s report.

For best viewing on mobile, turn your device horizontally. Still
unable to view the table? Click here.

Table with 4 columns and 50 rows. Currently displaying rows 1 to 10.
State Lower end Upper end
New Jersey $64,224 $192,692
Maryland $63,321 $189,982
Massachusetts $62,986 $188,976
Hawaii $61,633 $184,916
California $61,028 $183,102
Washington $60,865 $182,612
New Hampshire $59,989 $179,984
Colorado $59,529 $178,604
Utah $59,439 $178,336
Connecticut $58,947 $176,858
Table with 4 columns and 50 rows. Currently displaying rows 11 to 20.
State Lower end Upper end
Alaska $58,741 $176,242
Virginia $57,243 $171,746
Minnesota $54,887 $164,676
Delaware $54,777 $164,348
Rhode Island $54,564 $163,708
New York $53,033 $159,114
Illinois $51,134 $153,416
Oregon $50,433 $151,314
Arizona $49,707 $149,136
Vermont $49,322 $147,982
skip down to
Iowa $46,387 $139,176
Maine $46,357 $139,086
Florida $46,197 $138,606
Kansas $45,945 $137,850
Montana $45,083 $135,262
North Carolina $44,983 $134,962
Michigan $44,653 $133,972
Indiana $44,519 $133,570
Ohio $43,809 $131,440
Tennessee $43,498 $130,508
and the bottom is
Missouri $43,203 $129,622
South Carolina $42,739 $128,230
New Mexico $39,813 $119,452
Alabama $39,779 $119,348
Oklahoma $39,778 $119,346
Kentucky $39,557 $118,682
Arkansas $36,951 $110,864
Louisiana $36,940 $110,832
West Virginia $36,216 $108,658
Mississippi $35,142 $105,438
Table: Addy Bink, NexstarSource: SmartAssetCreated with Datawrapper

While New Jersey had the highest state-level middle class range, none
of its cities ranked among the 10 most expensive cities. Instead,
California cities dominated the upper end of the list.

It was Sunnyvale, a Bay Area city northwest of San Jose, that has the
richest middle class range: you need a household salary of at least
$113,176 to be “middle income.” If you have your sights set for
upper class status in Sunnyvale, SmartAsset determined you would need
a salary of at least $339,562.

In six cities — California’s Sunnyvale, Fremont, San Mateo, and
Santa Clara; Bellevue, Washington; and Highlands Ranch, Colorado —
you need a household salary of more than $101,000 to be a
middle-earner.

A six-figure salary would put you among the upper class in the 10
cities on the opposite end of SmartAsset’s list. The most affordable
city, the report found, was Detroit, where an annual salary of just
$24,300 would make you middle class. Close behind was Cleveland, Ohio,
which had a low-end middle class benchmark of $24,898.

Across the 10 cities with the lowest middle class range, a household
salary of at least $30,000 would be enough to qualify as a middle
income earner.

The interactive table below shows the 345 cities SmartAsset analyzed,
as well as the lower and upper bounds of their middle class.

For best viewing on mobile, turn your device horizontally. Still
unable to view the table? Click here.

You can view SmartAsset’s full report here.

Though it has tumbled from a peak of 9.1% in the summer of 2022,
inflation has remained elevated so far this year. Prices excluding
volatile food and energy costs rose 3.8% in March from a year earlier,
the same as in the previous month and well above the Federal
Reserve’s target. On Thursday, the Labor Department reported that
the four-week average number of Americans filing for jobless benefits
has remained unchanged, defying efforts by the Fed to cool hiring.

‘Cicada-geddon’: Which states will soon be bombarded with cicadas?
Last week, in an exclusive interview with Nexstar, the parent company
of this outlet, President Joe Biden admitted inflation is being
“stubborn and not going down to 2%.” He further called our economy
“the strongest…of any country in the world,” but adding,
“we’ve got more to do.”

“We’ve created over 15 million new jobs. And the salaries are
outpacing the cost of inflation. Lot of good happening,” he added.
“But still, it’s those small things that matter in a big way to
ordinary people. And that’s what we have to work on.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

TAGS JOE BIDEN
Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

SHARE
POST

Lost in the dust are the millions of jobs sent to Mexico, China, Korea and Brazil. It's ironic and funny that Democrats look at fast food work as
career or lifetime employment.

It's a mess of their own making. They bitched about the environment and
heaped unnecessary regulations on business overall, so business left.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.law-enforcement, ca.politics, or.politics
XPost: seattle.politics, seattle.politics

Pinnacle <invalid@yahoo.com> wrote in news:ba1761e3877768f390a2b70f8b33a0b9@dizum.com:

Lost in the dust are the millions of jobs sent to Mexico, China, Korea
and Brazil.

Nope. Employment in the US is at an all-time high - and companies are complaining they can't find workers.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.law-enforcement, ca.politics, or.politics
XPost: seattle.politics

In news:v0cgaa$2peak$1@dont-email.me, Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:

Pinnacle <invalid@yahoo.com> wrote in news:ba1761e3877768f390a2b70f8b33a0b9@dizum.com:

Lost in the dust are the millions of jobs sent to Mexico, China,
Korea and Brazil.

Nope. Employment in the US is at an all-time high ...

2nd and 3rd jobs.

...- and companies are complaining they can't find workers.

https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.law-enforcement, ca.politics, or.politics
XPost: seattle.politics

On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 02:48:43 -0000 (UTC)
Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:

Pinnacle <invalid@yahoo.com> wrote in news:ba1761e3877768f390a2b70f8b33a0b9@dizum.com:

Lost in the dust are the millions of jobs sent to Mexico, China,
Korea and Brazil.

Nope.

Yep - fact:

https://www.epi.org/publication/china-trade-outsourcing-and-jobs/

Growth in the U.S. goods trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2013 eliminated or displaced 3.2 million U.S. jobs, 2.4 million (three-fourths) of which were in manufacturing. These lost manufacturing jobs account for about two-thirds of all U.S.
manufacturing jobs lost or displaced between December, 2001 and December 2013.

Among specific industries, the trade deficit in the computer and electronic parts industry grew the most, and 1,249,100 jobs were lost or displaced, 39.6 percent of the 2001–2013 total. As a result, many of the hardest-hit congressional districts were
in California, Texas, Oregon, Massachusetts, and Minnesota, where jobs in that industry are concentrated. Some districts in New York, Georgia, and Illinois were also especially hard-hit by trade-related job displacement in a variety of manufacturing
industries, including computer and electronic parts, textiles and apparel, and furniture.

The growing trade deficit with China has cost jobs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Using a new model and new congressional district data to estimate the job impacts of trade for the 113th Congress, this study also finds that job losses
occurred in every congressional district but one.1

This summary of the jobs impact of trade with China arise from the following specific findings of this study:

Most of the jobs lost or displaced by trade with China between 2001 and 2013 were in manufacturing industries (2.4 million jobs, or 75.7 percent).
Within manufacturing, rapidly growing imports of computer and electronic parts (including computers, parts, semiconductors, and audio and video equipment) accounted for 56.0 percent of the $240.1 billion increase in the U.S. goods trade deficit with
China between 2001 and 2013. The growth of this deficit eliminated 1,249,100 U.S. jobs in computer and electronic parts in this period. Indeed, in 2013, the total U.S. trade deficit with China was $324.2 billion—$154.4 billion of which was in computer
and electronic parts.
Global trade in advanced technology products—often discussed as a source of comparative advantage for the United States—is instead dominated by China. This broad category of high-end technology products includes the more advanced elements of the
computer and electronic parts industry as well as other sectors such as biotechnology, life sciences, aerospace, and nuclear technology. In 2013, the United States had a $116.9 billion deficit in advanced technology products with China, and this deficit
was responsible for 36.0 percent of the total U.S.-China goods trade deficit. In contrast, the United States had a $35.6 billion surplus in advanced technology products with the rest of the world in 2013.
Other industrial sectors hit hard by the growing trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2013 include apparel (203,900 jobs); textile mills and textile product mills (106,800); fabricated metal products (141,200); electrical equipment, appliances, and
components (96,700); furniture and related products (94,700); plastics and rubber products (72,800); motor vehicles and parts (34,800); and miscellaneous manufactured goods (107,600). Several service sectors were also hit hard, by indirect job losses,
including administrative and support and waste management and remediation services (196,900) and professional, scientific, and technical services (169,900).
The 3.2 million U.S. jobs lost or displaced by the goods trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2013 were distributed among all 50 states and the District of Columbia, with the biggest net losses occurring in California (564,200 jobs), Texas (304,700),
New York (179,200), Illinois (132,500), Pennsylvania (122,600), North Carolina (119,600), Florida (115,700), Ohio (106,400), Massachusetts (97,200), and Georgia (93,700).
In percentage terms, the jobs lost or displaced due to the growing goods trade deficit with China in the 10 hardest-hit states ranged from 2.44 percent to 3.67 percent of the total state employment: Oregon (62,700 jobs lost or displaced, equal to 3.67
percent of total state employment), California (564,200 jobs, 3.43 percent), New Hampshire (22,700 jobs, 3.31 percent), Minnesota (83,300 jobs, 3.05 percent), Massachusetts (97,200 jobs, 2.96 percent), North Carolina (119,600 jobs, 2.85 percent), Texas (
304,700 jobs, 2.66 percent), Rhode Island (13,200 jobs, 2.58 percent), Vermont (8,200 jobs, 2.51 percent), and Idaho (16,700 jobs, 2.44 percent).
The hardest-hit congressional districts were concentrated in states that were heavily exposed to the growing U.S.-China trade deficit in computer and electronic parts and other durable goods industries such as furniture as well nondurable industries such
as textiles and apparel. The three hardest-hit congressional districts were all located in Silicon Valley in California, including the 17th (South Bay, encompassing Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Santa Clara, Fremont, Newark, North San Jose, and Miltpitas2),
which lost 61,500 jobs, equal to 17.77 percent of all jobs in the district), the 18th Congressional District (including parts of San Jose, Palo Alto, Redwood City, Mountain View, and Los Gatos), which lost 50,700 jobs, 14.72 percent), and the 19th
Congressional District (most of San Jose and other parts of Santa Clara County, which lost 39,900 jobs, 12.31 percent of all jobs). Of the top 20 hardest-hit districts, eight were in California (in rank order, the 17th, 18th, 19th, 15th, 40th, 34th, 52nd,
and 45th), six were in Texas (31st, 3rd, 10th, 18th, 17th, and 2nd), and one each in Oregon (1st), Massachusetts (3rd), Georgia (14th), Minnesota (1st), New York (18th), and Illinois (6th). Job losses in these districts ranged from 13,900 jobs to 61,500
jobs, and 4.28 percent to 17.77 percent of total district jobs.
The job displacement estimates in this study are conservative. They include only the jobs directly or indirectly displaced by trade, and exclude jobs in domestic wholesale and retail trade or advertising; they also exclude respending employment.3 They
also do not account for the fact that during the Great Recession of 2007–2009, and continuing through 2013, jobs displaced by China trade reduced wages and spending, which led to further job losses.

Further, the jobs impact of the U.S. trade deficit with China is not limited to job loss and displacement and the associated direct wages losses. Competition with low-wage workers from less-developed countries such as China has driven down wages for
workers in U.S. manufacturing and reduced the wages and bargaining power of similar, non-college-educated workers throughout the economy, as previous EPI research has shown. The affected population includes essentially all workers with less than a four-
year college degree—roughly 70 percent of the workforce, or about 100 million workers (U.S. Census Bureau 2012).

As earlier EPI research has shown, trade with China between 2001 and
2011 displaced 2.7 million workers, who suffered a direct loss of $37.0
billion in reduced wages alone in 2011 (Scott 2013a). The nation’s 100 million non-college educated workers suffered a total loss of roughly
$180 billion due to increased trade with low-wage countries (Bivens
2013). These indirect wage losses were nearly five times greater than
the direct losses suffered by workers displaced by China trade, and the
pool of affected workers was nearly 40 times larger (100 million non-college-educated workers versus 2.7 million displaced workers).

Employment in the US is at an all-time high - and companies
are complaining they can't find (CHEAP)workers.

fify

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)