Slashdot Mirror

And that doesn't include the 887,000 systems analysts, computer scientists, and database administrators, some of which are almost certainly working in programming positions.

However, given that these numbers (1,282,000 computer programmers and software engineers) are from the year two thousand, before the massive layoffs of the past few years really started happening, the 941,584 number doesn't seem all that out of the ballpark.

And that doesn't include the 887,000 systems analysts, computer scientists, and database administrators, some of which are almost certainly working in programming positions.

However, given that these numbers (1,282,000 computer programmers and software engineers) are from the year two thousand, before the massive layoffs of the past few years really started happening, the 941,584 number doesn't seem all that out of the ballpark.

And that doesn't include the 887,000 systems analysts, computer scientists, and database administrators, some of which are almost certainly working in programming positions.

However, given that these numbers (1,282,000 computer programmers and software engineers) are from the year two thousand, before the massive layoffs of the past few years really started happening, the 941,584 number doesn't seem all that out of the ballpark.

According the the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CPI dropped in November by .03%. The main inflationary pressure in the US right now is from the weaker dollar. The economist and other right wing rags have been lauding the the weaker dollar as it should end up helping the US labor market while increasing the value of the cash in other countries to help increase their consumer spending. The xmas index is just about a small bag of goods with wild price swings.

The CPI is calculated over a rather large shopping bag of goods.

It's quite interesting to see your choice of 1999 as a year of comparison, since May 2000 saw the start of a recession which this country has only recently pulled out of. But perhaps it is your position that Bush is to blame for a recession which began in May of 2000, and which the country has recovered from only due to his tax cuts?

What Bush can take credit for is how unemployment numbers have changed in response to his economic programs -- and those numbers, which you can view here have dropped at a faster rate over the last six months than they have over any six month period since 1993.

Does that include the number of discourged workers who aren't even counted in the "benefit rolls", because their benefits have run out? No.

That's why BLS measures unemployment not just by the household survey, which is what you are referring to, but also by tyhe payroll survey. Learn all about it here Employment Situation Summary

Note both of these may actually overestimate unemployment because they don't account for workers payed underthe table in cash.

The reason for the recesion is clear. Clinton/Gore kept pumping and pumping the bubble. Where were they when Enron / Worldcom / Wall Street were up to their shenanigans? That's right hitting, up the ChiComs for campaign donations and hitting up interns for BJ's.

We will never forget Gore claiming that Bush was "talking down the economy" in 2000. Everyone in the world except to D's realized the mess they had gotten us in.

and FYI

Bush's approval rating is at 61%

And some Democrats (Dean, Kucinich) do have an agenda

We know what it is.

1. Raise taxes.
2. Surreder to Hussein.

Good luck with that platform.

If there is a disparity between mean and median, mean would be higher here, since the high paying jobs would distort the distribution and pull up the mean.

And it's the Bureau of Labour Statistics. :)

And it's the Bureau of Labour Statistics. :)

Monthy Unemployment Rate
Bureau of Labor and Statistics homepage

Monthy Unemployment Rate
Bureau of Labor and Statistics homepage

That's why there are no jobs in the US anymore.

Don't you think you are being just a little dramatic? I mean, our 6.0% unemployment rate isn't very good, but we have certainly seen a lot worse unemployment in the past. I count 18 years since 1948 with unemployement rates higher than 6.0%, and an average rate of 5.625%. Lets try to keep this in perspective.

Your standard garden variety law student fresh out of one of the top national schools, with no experience under her belt, gets 125K a year. A couple tens of millions makes a bonus that a partner yawns at.

I had to laugh when I read this. Is this really what people think? There are many lawyers out there, but only so many 125K-starting pay jobs. The median salary for lawyers is around $89,000 -- and this is for all lawyers in this country, not just the fresh out of law school ones. Really, only the top students out of the top national schools get the opportunity to earn 125K with no experience. Also, there are very, very few firms at which partners even average profits per partner near or above a million dollars (sorry, only 2000 PPP figures). The rest of the thousands upon thousands of law firms and lawyers earn pretty normal salaries.

What do you mean by that? The US Bureau of Labor Statistics can put your misinformed viewpoint to rest.

Where do the statistics come from?

Because unemployment insurance records, which many people think are the source of total unemployment data, relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940 when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. As explained later, the CPS estimates, beginning in 1994, reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey.

What are the basic concepts of employment and unemployment?

The basic concepts involved in identifying the employed and unemployed are quite simple:

* People with jobs are employed.
* People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
* People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force.

Who is counted as employed?

Not all of the wide range of job situations in the American economy fit neatly into a given category. For example, people are considered employed if they did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey week. This includes all part-time and temporary work, as well as regular full-time year-round employment. Persons also are counted as employed if they have a job at which they did not work during the survey week because they were:

* On vacation;
* Ill;
* Experiencing child-care problems;
* Taking care of some other family or personal obligation;
* On maternity or paternity leave;
* Involved in an industrial dispute; or
* Prevented from working by bad weather.

Who is counted as unemployed?

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.

Who is not in the labor force?

All members of the civilian noninstitutional population are eligible for inclusion in the labor force, and those 16 and over who have a job or are actively looking for one are so classified. All others--those who have no job and are not looking for one--are counted as "not in the labor force." Many who do not participate in the labor force are going to school or are retired. Family responsibilities keep others out of the labor force. Still others have a physical or mental disability which prevents them from participating in labor force activities.

Sorry about your ego.

Men earn more than women for the same jobs. A lot more. Whether it physician or waiter or nurse, men almost always get paid more. This is a fact. You can check it out at the Bureau of Labor Statistics website. BTW, tall people earning more is OFN.

Hmmm. You seem to be forgetting that our unemployment rate is only around 6%. 6% is a hell of a lot better than most of europe, and it isn't even historically bad for the United States!

Make Better Movies, make us WANT to go to the theatre, make us excited enough to go, otherwise they will destroy themselves fighting a trend that will never cease to move forward.

One problem: they've already done this. At least, according to an Australian friend of mine, they have experimented there with releasing movies simultaneously on video and in the theatre, and found that theatre results were unchanged... and video sales were non-existent (sorry, can't find a link to verify this, but he's not known for making stuff up).

There is no substitute for seeing a movie in a theatre, no matter how good your home theatre system is. If you want the theatre experience, you will pay for it... otherwise, movie ticket prices wouldn't have increased by 38% over the last decade, while the CPI has risen 24% (using my own memories of paying $8 to see a movie in college, versus paying $11 at most theatres now... and the Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI data for Los Angeles, where I live).

This is not about recovering lost sales. It's about control over who sees what when. It's about the fear that if people get used to seeing what they want how they want when they want, they *might* lose control, and someday may lose money too. But in my opinion, they're digging their own grave.

The best thing is if you can meet them in person and talk about price.

1) Suggest that you work for a range of prices depending on the number of hours per week and the length of commitment. Start naming numbers going up, when they blink, you know you've reached your price point.

or

2) Ask, "How much are you authorized for?"

or

3) Ask, "How much do you pay your best contractors?"

or

4) "What is the budget for this project?" (if none, when will it be assigned, who will do the asignment)

5) Look at their job postings for technical lead or senior positions, if they have a dollar figure, use that to base your rates (i.e. 80k/yr = about $40/hr + benefits, the bls has statistics for % of pay in terms of benefits by area of the country) Add this to their effective hourly rate. This is the minimum you should charge, you have unique experience with something they want!

According to the Department of Labor, here were the unemployment rates for January of the following years:
1989: 5.4%

1990: 5.4%

1991: 6.4%

1992: 7.3%

1993: 7.3%
...

2001: 4.1%

2002: 5.6%

2003: 5.7%

Not a single year of decline. Period.

I'm sorry if it sounds stupid, but it's true. They're called discouraged workers, those who have given up trying to find a job. Maybe the next time you find yourself in the situation of either believing some random person on /. or blindly trusting your government to act reasonably, you'll think twice.

Average income peaked in 1973, bottomed in 1996, and is currently about where it was in 1984. See the BLS statistics page.

The Census Bureau publishes less frequently updated median household income figures. Basically, median household income increased about 6% from 1969 to 1966. Average per capita income is up 51%; thus most of the increase is in the upper (wealthier) half of the population.

The census figures are per-household; BLS figures are per-worker. The discrepancy reflects the increase in two-worker families. You get less per hour worked than in 1973, and families are keeping up only by having both people work.

By comparison, median per capita income increased 50% between 1953 and 1973. Those were the days when the future looked bright.

1) Go to the BLS web site
2) Click constant dollars to adjust for inflation
3) Click retrieve data
4) Change from tab to 1968
5) Click go
6) Remember to have adjusted for inflation (step 2)

I think the people selling Horatio Algers stories or making Amway pitches should stick with pie-in-the-sky rhetoric. You guys sound like you're hyping a pump and dump dot-bomb so it goes up to 100 before collapsing again. The data is not in your favor, not in terms of wages, hours worked, savings and debt, comparison to the productivity of European workers and so on. Nor is the rationale in your favor if you want to look at the Forbes 400 richest list and see how many of them inherited all of their money and the like.

US Unemployment Rate since 1948

US Inflation Rate History

US Per Capita Income History Since 1950

the median salary for a US Systems Administrator was $64,271. As of 2002, the average salary was $67,675 ($67,920 for males, and $64,946 for females).

That's nice, but according to the US Bureau Of Labor Statistics' CPI Inflation Calculator, in order for your $64,271 salary to be keep pace with inflation, you'd have to be making $69,401. Since you made less than that, you've effectively gotten a paycut.

(Note, the calculator doesn't accept values greater than $9999.99. I assume this is because, to the current Adminstration, you're considered "rich" if you make more than that amount. However, no matter, just divide your salary by ten first, then multiply the output by 10. Or if you're Richard Grasso, divide and multiply by 100,000. HTH, Dick. )

With not quite a million slashdot anonymous cowards, that Bureau of Labor Statistic makes for more than all the software developers, I&T guys, database report wizards and embedded software engineers by twice here in U.S of A (not to mention outside world).

Yes, you may be a lowly I&T worker; but you probably should not be worthy of posting ludicrous assumptions at Slashdot.

And Ah, 95% of slashdot readers are Microsoft involved? Mmmmm. I put money down that this is closer to 85% or less that the readers are deeply involved in Microsoft-specific stuff than they would be deeper in Unix.

Try working 60-80 hours a week as a Sr. Embedded Software Engineer for 22 years at top-notched startup companies, so that experience becomes you.

Where the hell did you get 60% working poor? accorrding to 2000 stats Bureau of Labor there are only 6.4 million working poor. However I do agree about letting the **AA Try to sue everyone. Bring it on.

First off, here's here's what people really do in the US.

• Office and administrative support: 22.7M.
• Sales and related: 13.4M.
• Production: 11.2M.
• Transportation and material moving: 9.4M.
• Food preparation and service: 9.9M.
• Education, training, and library: 7.6M.
• Management: 7.2M.
• Construction and extraction: 6.2M.
• Healthcare: 6.1M.
• Installation, repair, and maintenance: 5.3M.
• Business and financial operatins: 4.6M.
• Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance: 4.3M.
• Healthcare support: 3.1M
• Protective services: 3.0M
• Computer and mathematical: 2.8M.
• ...

Robots aren't going to make a dent in many of those categories any time soon. Production is already very heavily mechanized and automated. Except for clothing, few things are made by hand in volume any more.

The problem is that computers are still way too dumb. Computers and the Internet should have put a much bigger dent in the "office and administrative support" category than they have so far.

If the developed world really had to cut employment (say, to fight a WWII sized war), much could be done. The US is over-stored by a factor of two (how many malls are near you?). There's far more advertising and unnecessary product variety (there were only five different consumer VHS VCRs at peak, despite the number of different front panels) than is of any use. Forced standardization of business practices (there are only a few allowed forms of Medicare supplement policies, so direct price comparison is possible) would simplify business operations and reduce advertising.

None of this seems likely, unless, of course, North Korea makes their move.

The result is an unprecedented mismatch between the workforce and the demands of a growing high-tech economy. Projections by the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate that the seven fastest-growing occupations this decade will all be in technology. Demand for applications software engineers and tech support specialists, for example, will double by 2010, according to the BLS. (See "The 10 Fastest-Growing Occupations," opposite page.) Even the seventh-ranked category, database administrators, is projected to grow by a stunning 66 percent. These high-demand tech fields will be the first to feel the labor crunch. By 2005, Carnevale says, "we'll start to see spot shortages all over the place." In some fields he predicts, employers will be reduced to filling desperate job shortages with unqualified workers. By the following decade, when the bulk of the baby boomers big their cubicles goodbye, a broad swath of corporate America will be scraping the bottom of the barrel for white-collar workers.

Lifted from an ad for a POLICE / FIRE COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST

THE POSITION

Under supervision, receives and dispatches emergency and routine calls for police and fire service; operates a variety of communications equipment including public safety radio, telephones and recorders; determines nature, priority and disposition of calls using a computer aided dispatch (CAD) system; maintains radio communications and status of police and fire field units; and does other work as required.

The Combined Communications Center is a 24-hour facility located at the Police Department. Incumbents must be available to work weekends, holidays, call back, standby, and rotating shifts. The current shifts are: Day Shift 6:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; Evening Shift 4:00 p.m. to 2:30 a.m.; and Night Shift 9:00 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. Shifts are rotated every 12 weeks (from day shift, to evening shift, to night shift); there are no exceptions to shift work.

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

Ability to: Follow oral and written instructions; learn police and fire radio operations and procedures, local streets, police beats, fire districts, the classifications of crimes and recognition of common police and fire codes in order to obtain information from the public, initiate a response, and accurately record information; remember instructions and information; clearly and tactfully communicate factual information to citizens; question callers while simultaneously typing information into a computer terminal.

Skill in: Operating a computer terminal; listening and speaking clearly and responding quickly and accurately to emergency and routine requests for assistance.

Desirable Qualifications: Spanish-speaking skills; experience/training as an emergency communications operator, dispatcher or similar position requiring knowledge of emergency medical or public safety operations; coursework in criminal justice or communications; prior computer-aided dispatch (CAD) experience.

Typing Certification of 30 net w.p.m. is required. You must submit a copy of a typing certificate of 30 net w.p.m. (gross words-per-minute minus errors) with your application. The typing certificate must have been obtained within the last twelve months. The City does not give typing tests.

EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS

High school graduate or equivalent (myemphasis)

Lifted from an ad for a UNIVERSITY POLICE OFFICER TRAINEE

REQUIRMENTS

University Police Officers meet the highest police standards in New York State.

To become a University Officer, a person must:

be 21 years of age

be a New York State Resident

have completed 60 college credit hours(my emphasis)

possess a valid New York State drivers license

pass a written Civil Service examination

pass a medical examination

have binocular acuity of 20/20 corrected or uncorrected, and no less than 20/100 uncorrected

pass a physical agility test (includes testing for cardiovascular and muscular endurance, strength, and flexibility)

pass a psychological examination

pass an extensive background investigation

pass 16 weeks of basic training administered by SUNY at the New York State Police Academy in Albany.

complete a probationary period of employment.

Median Police Salary $ 36964

Median Dispatcher Salary $24299

I dunno, the dems seem to think jobs are a shambles, but they seem to propose socialistic solutions that are used by European countries with much worse unemployment. Sure, I'd like 3% unemployment, but 5-10 years ago, they were worried that 3% would cause inflation and really 4-5% was ideal. With unemployment at 6.2%, it hardly seems accurate to say the sky is falling. Despite how much Dean or the dems would like to shout about it...

Tax rates in the EU are not 'very high'...

Tax rates in the EU are a lot higher than in the US. The total tax burden in most EU countries is also much higher. In the US the various levels of govenment (i.e. everything from federal to local), spend about 30% of GDP. In the EU it is typically somewhere between 40% and 50%. You can see the latest OECD figures here.

Unemployment is also not 'very high', as you suggest.

But is is consistently much higher than the US. Even at its peak the unemployment rate in the US was much lower than the rates in most EU countries. Historically the rates in EU countries like France and Germany have been about double the rate in the US, and even now the US rate is much lower. If you take a look at the standardised rates published by the OECD then the US was at about 6% in '02, while many EU countries were at about 9% (France, Germany, Italy, Spain). The rate in the UK was closer to the US rate.

I'd suggest taking a look at the US' rapidly rising unemployment rate, a value that shows no signs of declining

I suggest you take a look here, where you will find the following claim:

The unemployment rate was 6.2 percent in July; the number of unemployed
persons was 9.1 million. Both measures edged down over the month...

So in addition to a larger GDP, and per capita disposable income, the US also has far lower tax rates, and a far lower unemployment. Over the last ten years or so the US growth rate has also been much higher than in the EU, so the differences are likely to increase not decrease.

The method of deriving unemployment statistics has been changed at least 5 times since the 1950's.

Well, that would be an interesting caveat. I can't find any reference to it on the BLS web site, but I'll take your word for it. A reference would be nice, however.

I will still argue, however, that unemployment was worse in the early 90s that in is today. See this page for the basis for my position. Expand the graph to include 1990-present-- looks rather sinusoidal, eh?

in California is approximately 8%, and has gone UP or remained stable almost every month for the last couple years.

Except for this report which indicates that unemployment in CA is actually ~6.7% (and hasn't even been within 0.5% of 8% since July 1996 [7.6%]). In fact, things aren't that bad right now compared to the crunch in 1993 when unemployment in CA was over 10%!

Listen, I live in CA too (the bay area even!). Luckily, I am employed. My live-in girlfriend is not, so it affects me too. I agree that things are tough in the educated job market, moreso in the high tech market. My argument is that unemployment is not totally out of whack from where it has been for years. It's just that it has shifted from blue collar to white collar (and a vocal, Slashdot-poster type market). It sucks that anyone has to be unemployed, but the big news isn't that unemployment is up-- it's that white-collar unemployment is (I>really up.

I never said that you should move. Lord knows, my neighborhood in San Francisco gets more empty every week (great for rents, though!). But if you choose to stay, you have to recognize that it's a choice. I don't I'd be too happy if my girlfriend asked me to move to India or China or wherever else white-collar jobs are headed these days.

Year Annual
1950 5.21
1955 4.37
1960 5.54
1965 4.51
1970 4.98
1975 8.48
1980 7.18
1985 7.19
1990 5.62
1995 5.59
2000 4.00
2003YTD 5.97

### June 2003 Data ###
7.9% Construction
7.0% Manufacturing
6.9% Wholesale and Retail Trade
5.5% Transportation and Utilities
6.4% Information Industry
4.0% Financial Activities
8.5% Professional and Business Services <-----<<
4.4% Education and Health Services
8.6% Leisure and Hospitality *
5.9% Other Services Industry
6.9% Agricultural and Related

1. Inflation. According to the Consumer price index, an item that cost $100 in 1980, cost $143.57 in 1988.

2. Population increase. The US population in 1980 was 226.5 million. In 1988 it was 243.9 million. An increase of 7.7%. So there were more people to pay taxes, and more people to receive benefits.

I recall that there are exemptions for certain types of research. For example, the BLS has phone surveys on employment research.

However, a blanket exclusion of "market research" would pretty much nullify the entire program since marketers would just make every call a "research call."

"Have you every wanted to make a million dollars with no effort?"

"Have you ever heard the magic three letters 'MLM'?"

I am not a doctor, but some of my dearest friends are doctors and dentists. Although all of them feel harried by the press of work, they are all doing quite well financially. Still, this is subjective, let's look at the numbers.

According to the 2000 occupational survey by the US Dept. of Labor the mean annual salary of a family practice physician in the U.S. is $107,780. Note that dentists and the various flavors of physicians have the highest mean annual salaries of all the listed occupations, beating out even lawyers and CEOs.

I couldn't find national figures, but in Washington state a family practice physician who doesn't deliver babies pays an average of $10,000 a year in malpractice insurance. I recognize that the hours are long, and the responsility great, but this is still not a bad living. Bear in mind that other professions also have professional expenses and long hours.

There is a crisis in malpractice coverage of several important specialites (1/6th of all the neurosurgeons in Seattle lost their coverage last week), but general whining about how poor physicians are is not going to fly.

You're comparing apples and oranges.. The only thing historic about our unemployment rate is the record amount of government statistical fudging.

Here are a few tidbits.. Start with the U6 rate.. 10.4 % or about 15 Million under/unemployed workers.

Tack on a few other factors..
Like of the 9 Million DOL's has labeled as "Self Employed" workers, but only 1 in 5 are paying enough individual estimated taxes to cover Self employment taxes(15.3%) for a full time minimum wage (2000hr x5.15/hr *.9285 *.153).
Note: This assumes the other 4 out of 5 make zero income and I'm not even accounting for fed income taxes.
Note: Fed's inflict heavy penalties for underpayment of estimated taxes..
Net result, shift 7 million of the 9 million to the under/unemployed category.

"Disability rolls rise, skew labor data "
That's good enough to add 3 another million to the unemployed/uncounted catagory.

Add in the FACT that the DOL changed(1994) the household survey data collection method(page 180) and resulting in the doubling of the non-parcipation rate, from Five (5) to Ten (10) Percent(*2)(Page181) . The DOL accomplished this feat by substituting a scientifically sound MAIL IN form, with scientifically discredited IN PERSON interviews. Just imagine those newly intimidated 5% additional non responding households had at least one(1) unemployed worker. Tack on another 5 Million to the unemployed roles.

Estimates indicate that at least 2 million homeless people are roaming the streets, but you'll never see the DOL performing a household survey on homeless shelter.

So in short order, I've found, (with some minor overlapping of subsets),
Enough under/unemployed workers to double the U6 rate to over 20%..

.

You're comparing apples and oranges.. The only thing historic about our unemployment rate is the record amount of government statistical fudging.

Here are a few tidbits.. Start with the U6 rate.. 10.4 % or about 15 Million under/unemployed workers.

Tack on a few other factors..
Like of the 9 Million DOL's has labeled as "Self Employed" workers, but only 1 in 5 are paying enough individual estimated taxes to cover Self employment taxes(15.3%) for a full time minimum wage (2000hr x5.15/hr *.9285 *.153).
Note: This assumes the other 4 out of 5 make zero income and I'm not even accounting for fed income taxes.
Note: Fed's inflict heavy penalties for underpayment of estimated taxes..
Net result, shift 7 million of the 9 million to the under/unemployed category.

"Disability rolls rise, skew labor data "
That's good enough to add 3 another million to the unemployed/uncounted catagory.

Add in the FACT that the DOL changed(1994) the household survey data collection method(page 180) and resulting in the doubling of the non-parcipation rate, from Five (5) to Ten (10) Percent(*2)(Page181) . The DOL accomplished this feat by substituting a scientifically sound MAIL IN form, with scientifically discredited IN PERSON interviews. Just imagine those newly intimidated 5% additional non responding households had at least one(1) unemployed worker. Tack on another 5 Million to the unemployed roles.

Estimates indicate that at least 2 million homeless people are roaming the streets, but you'll never see the DOL performing a household survey on homeless shelter.

So in short order, I've found, (with some minor overlapping of subsets),
Enough under/unemployed workers to double the U6 rate to over 20%..

.

A computer programmer per the BLS, will:

Convert project specifications and statements of problems and procedures to detailed logical flow charts for coding into computer language. Develop and write computer programs to store, locate, and retrieve specific documents, data, and information. May program web sites.

A software engineer for applications per the BLS, will:

Develop, create, and modify general computer applications software or specialized utility programs. Analyze user needs and develop software solutions. Design software or customize software for client use with the aim of optimizing operational efficiency. May analyze and design databases within an application area, working individually or coordinating database development as part of a team. Exclude "Computer Hardware Engineers" (17-2061).

Research, design, develop, and test operating systems-level software, compilers, and network distribution software for medical, industrial, military, communications, aerospace, business, scientific, and general computing applications. Set operational specifications and formulate and analyze software requirements. Apply principles and techniques of computer science, engineering, and mathematical analysis.

Your wallet may have been slim with him in office, but you were one the few. The numbers speak for themselves the unemployment rate here in Ohio was up around 7.0% when Clinton came into office and steadily fell. Since G.W. Bush has been in office it keeps going back up. Looks like he is trying to repeat his daddy's legacy ... oh yeah ... he was the one that took the unemployment rate up so high before Clinton took office.

According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics' Occupational Outlook Handbook, median annual earnings of astronomers were $74,510... I'm still not sure who they interviewed to get these numbers, however. They seem astronomically high for an astronomer's pay:^)

the fact that his state (Oregon) has the highest unemployment figures in the union instead of worrying about stuff like this? How is this gonna help the Oregon economy anyway?

The BLS puts the average US wage at $14.98 a year...which would is $30,000. We can't all be above average, now, can we?

Economy at a glance

3%? Maybe that's where it should be, but that's hardly the long term trend. Have a look here. Especially have a look at the 70's and early 80's. I guess it depends when arcade games were first introduced at $0.25, whether or not current prices are above or below prevailing inflation rates. If you pick 1980 as the year, then arcades should now cost $0.55. If you pick 1975, then we're talking $0.85. I'm not sure which would be a better date, I'm not that old.

Regarding the poster's original dilema, the question boils down to this: Are you an "At-Will" employee? The at-will doctrine says that you can be fired for good reason, bad reason, no reason at all, or even an immoral reason, so long as the reason does not discriminate against a protected class (race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sexual preference, yadda, yadda, yadda).

So the fact that the poster has already been hired (he didn't say if he was enticed to quit another job, which might have some bearing), if he is an at-will employee, the company can, and probably will decide that they don't want his services if he doesn't agree to the background check. Here's a link (there are others) that explains at-will employment in more detail.

Globalization = cheap shirts, fewer jobs, and a fast-paced race to the bottom.

This would be a more impressive pronouncement if it were backed up with facts. But as globalization picked up steam in the 1990s, the unemployment rate dropped. In fact, surprisingly enough, the US unemployment rate pretty much mirrors the highs and lows of the US economy (driven by such factors as tax rates and consumer confidence) and has little to do with the success or failure of companies in Asia. Those are the facts as demonstrated by history.

Of course that's only one law school for another example -

Columbia Law:

The median starting salary for all graduates is $94,000

Stanford

New graduates from Ivy League schools hired at firms with national practices can earn $70,000 - $85,000 in their first year, but the majority of new hires earn in the $40,000 - $60,000 range. Starting salaries are somewhat lower in the corporate and public sectors. Eighth-year associates can earn between $85,000-$113,500 per year.

less well known law schools,

Case Western Reserve

The average salary for Class of 2001 graduates was over $75,000.

Of course this is for recent grads 1-2 years as were the statistics you quoted. One of the benefits of a specialized degree is that the upper bounds on individual salary is much higher, and one of the reasons the recent grads are working thier asses off at 90k per year is that if/when they make partner they'll be rolling in the cash (maybe working just as hard, but at a substantial boost in earnings)

We can also check salary reports for an estimate of what you should be looking for as a more experienced attorney,

Career Journal

Associate General Counsel working in US - National now earns an average salary of 310,054. Half of those in this position would earn between 230,122 and 332,812.

Position Description:
Conduct criminal and civil lawsuits, draw up legal documents, advise clients as to legal rights, and practice other phases of law. May represent client in court or before quasi-judicial or administrative agencies of government. May specialize in a single area of law, such as patent law, corporate law, or criminal law.

(although general counsel probably work for the side that lost this case, but hey they still got paid, actually by CD sales ;>)

Department of Labor statistics for all lawyers

Area - All United States
Occupation - Lawyers
Level - Overall
DataSource - Published
Year/Period - 2000/Jul
Hourly Rate - $38.70

Of course this data includes public lawyers which are paid significantly less than corporate/private practice lawyers in general, and includes all levels of experience.

And this survey of law firm compensation:

Law Department Compensation Benchmarking survey - Total cash compensation

Attorney - 2001 - $120,252

This is all just talk. Talk is cheap. As the saying goes, put your money where your mouth is.

In a perfect competitive free market, the wage of a worker is the equilibrium market price at which a worker gets paid and an employer pays them. It is the point at which the supply curve of the class of workers meets the demand curve of the employers for that worker class.

If demand for workers goes up, in the short term the number of workers won't change much, so the salaries will rise. In the long term supply will increase as more people transition to the field and salaries will moderate somewhat. Oversupply can happen as well and salaries will go down. The price of the worker, their salary, deterimines their economic worth (although their are altruistic worths as well, economic worth is all that counts in the market).

For an exercise, go to the US Labor Department and look at their Wage Statistics. Look through everything and look at what pays the best. It's not science, no matter how smart you are. The top three professions in terms of average wage are this: Executives, Doctors, and Lawyers.

In economics, price transmits information. The information transmitted by the market is that being an executive (CEO), doctor, or lawyer is economically the most valuable job you can have. Technical workers are well paid but much less than these top three.

It should be no surprise that students would strive for the top paying jobs. They're acting rationally based on the economic information transmitted by the price of labor.

If at some point the wage of technical workers and scientists is at the top of the wage pyramid, then you can expect everyone trying to do that. This almost happened in the late 90s with the Dot-Com boom, but it was too short of a cycle to affect long-term supply much.

Economics is key.

They stop getting counted in the statistics if they lose their phone service, though. The numbers are gathered through a phone survey. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has an summary that gives a better picture of the actual employment picture, but it still doesn't account for their systematic sampling errors.