(Roughly) Daily

Posts Tagged ‘salaries

“A man must always live by his work, and his wages must at least be sufficient to maintain him”*…

Infographic showing median annual salaries by occupation in the U.S. for 2024, with circles representing occupations sized by number of workers and colored by job category.

Nathan Yau is back with a(nother) arresting graphic analysis– this time, of the median salaries of different occupations in the U.S. (based on 2024– so, pre-purge— data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics). The median salary for full-time workers in the United States was $49,500; but salaries vary by occupation. The interactive infographic featured in the screengrab above shows– and allows you to explore– the spread…

Healthcare practitioners, such as surgeons and emergency medicine physicians, sit at the top. Airline pilot is the only occupation with a median salary above $220,000 that is not in the healthcare category. Then there are the CEOs and managers, followed by computer and math jobs. After that, most jobs sit below the $100,000-mark by median…

… The internet tends to skew our perception of how much people make. We see the things that people buy, but that is not always a good indicator for the wages people earn. These distributions are more bottom heavy than you might expect if you based your estimates on social media.

That said, all these jobs have a range of salaries, too. It’s not just variation within job categories, but variation for each job. The above charts, along with median salary, show 25th and 75th percentiles.

For example, construction supervisors make a median salary of $78,690, but 25% made $62,400 or less (25th percentile) and 75% made $100,200 or less (75th percentile).

There are also geographic differences, made more interesting by cost of living, but we’ll save that for another time…

Explore the comparative data: “Salary and Occupation” from @flowingdata.com.

It is, of course, important to remember (in a time like this, when so much attention is paid to the very rich) that this data excludes “unearned income,” the revenue that accrues to wealth (stocks, bonds, real estate, et al.) and the benefits of “contingent” stock/option bonuses. Along with inherited wealth, they explain most of the wealth gap (and economic angst) that plagues the U.S. today.

* Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations

###

As we investigate inequity, we might recall that on this date in 1859, Norton I distributed letters to the newspapers of San Francisco proclaiming himself Emperor of North America…

At the peremptory request and desire of a large majority of the citizens of these United States, I, Joshua Norton, formerly of Algoa Bay, Cape of Good Hope, and now for the last 9 years and 10 months past of S. F., Cal., declare and proclaim myself Emperor of these U. S.; and in virtue of the authority thereby in me vested, do hereby order and direct the representatives of the different States of the Union to assemble in Musical Hall, of this city, on the 1st day of Feb. next, then and there to make such alterations in the existing laws of the Union as may ameliorate the evils under which the country is laboring, and thereby cause confidence to exist, both at home and abroad, in our stability and integrity.

– NORTON I, Emperor of the United States.

Portrait of Emperor Joshua Norton I, standing with a sword, dressed in a military uniform with a feathered hat, set against a decorative backdrop.

source

Written by (Roughly) Daily

September 17, 2025 at 1:00 am

“America believes in education: the average professor earns more money in a year than a professional athlete earns in a whole week”*…

The highest-paid athlete in the world in 2022 was LeBron James, who took home $36.9 million in salary and winnings, and another $90 million in endorsements, for a total of $126.9 million; Lionel Messi was second, with a total of $122 million. As professional players’ salaries seem to be steadily rising, we might assume that they are the highest-paid athletes of all time. We would be wrong…

1st century poet and satirist Juvenal had much to say about the Roman obsession with ‘bread and games’: “Long ago the people shed their anxieties, ever since we do not sell our votes to anyone. For the people – who once conferred imperium, symbols of office, legions, everything – now hold themselves in check and anxiously desire only two things, the grain dole and chariot races in the Circus”. The very phrase panem et circenses denotes this nigh unhealthy preoccupation with ‘materialistic’ stuff – a scope whose parallel can certainly be drawn in our modern terms. And mirroring our fascination with many an athlete and celebrity sport-star, the ancient Romans possibly boasted the highest paid athlete in the history of mankind. We are talking about one Gaius Appuleius Diocles – who according to classical studies professor Peter Struck (at University of Chicago), amassed around some 35,863,120 sesterces in prize money. That is equivalent to about a whopping $15 billion… it should be noted that the prize money of 35,863,120 sesterces was won only in competitions, without the added benefits of modern-day sponsorship and advertisements…

Almost replicating a Formula 1 career progression, Diocles starting his gig as a charioteer at a young age of 18 for the so-designated White Team. By the age of 24 he switched to the Green Team, and finally by the age of 27 (till his retirement at 42), he made his move to the Red Team. When translated to figures, his career spanning over 24 years, resulted in 1,462 victories out of the 4,257 four-horse races. In fact, his specialty lay with four-horse races, and most of his enthralling wins came after he caught up with his competitors from behind…

The extraordinary story of “Gaius Appuleius Diocles – possibly the highest paid athlete in the history of mankind,” from @RealmofHistory.

Evan Esar (writing in the 1960s… so the comparison is probably more aptly a day or an hour)

###

As we ruminate on riches, we might recall that it was on this date in 1985 that the first WrestleMania was held at Madison Square Garden in New York. 19,121 fans watched Hulk Hogan and Mr. T defeated Paul Orndorff and Roddy Piper in the main event. on the undercard, Wendi Richter (accompanied by manager Cyndi Lauper) defeated Leilani Kai to win the WWF Women’s Championship, and Nikolai Volkoff and The Iron Sheik defeated The U.S. Express (Mike Rotundo and Barry Windham) to win the WWF Tag Team Championship. Celebrity guests included former heavyweight boxing champion Muhammad Ali as referee, baseball player/manager Billy Martin as ring announcer, and musician-actor Liberace as timekeeper.

source

“The basic underlying problem does not entail misbehavior or incompetence but rather stems from the nature of the provision of labor-intensive services”*…

Agatha Christie with her daughter Rosalind in 1924 [source]

Why is it that stuff– clothing, electronics, toys– keep getting cheaper, while services– healthcare, education, child care– continue to rise on price?

Agatha Christie’s autobiography, published posthumously in 1977, provides a fascinating window into the economic life of middle-class Britons a century ago. The year was 1919, the Great War had just ended, and Christie’s husband Archie had just been demobilized as an officer in the British military.

The couple’s annual income was around around £700 ($50,000 in today’s dollars)—£500 ($36,000) from his salary and another £200 ($14,000) in passive income.

hey rented a fourth-floor walk-up apartment in London with four bedrooms, two sitting rooms, and a “nice outlook on green.” The rent was £90 for a year ($530 per month in today’s dollars). To keep it tidy, they hired a live-in maid for £36 ($2,600) per year, which Christie described as “an enormous sum in those days.”

The couple was expecting their first child, a girl, and they hired a nurse to look after her. Still, Christie didn’t consider herself wealthy.

“Looking back, it seems to me extraordinary that we should have contemplated having both a nurse and a servant,” Christie wrote. “But they were considered essentials of life in those days, and were the last things we would have thought of dispensing with. To have committed the extravagance of a car, for instance, would never have entered our minds. Only the rich had cars.”…

By modern standards, these numbers seem totally out of whack. An American family today with a household income of $50,000 might have one or even two cars. But they definitely wouldn’t have a live-in maid or nanny. Even if it were legal today to offer someone a job that paid $2,600 per year, nobody would take it.

The price shifts Christie observed during her lifetime continued to widen after her death…

As you can see, cars aren’t the only things that get cheaper over time. In the last 30 years, clothing, children’s toys, and televisions have all gotten steadily cheaper as well—as have lots of other products not on the chart.

It’s one of the most important economic mysteries of the modern world. While the material things in life are cheaper than ever, labor-intensive services are getting more and more expensive. Middle-class Americans today have little trouble affording a car, but they struggle to afford a spot in day care. Only the rich have nannies.

Who is to blame? Some paint the government as the villain, blaming excessive regulations and poorly targeted subsidies. They aren’t entirely wrong. But the main cause is something more fundamental—and not actually sinister at all.

Back in the 1960s, the economist William Baumol observed that it took exactly as much labor to play a string quartet in 1965 as it did in 1865—in economics jargon, violinists hadn’t gotten any more productive. Yet the wages of a professional violinist in 1965 were a lot higher than in 1865.

The basic reason for this is that workers in other industries were getting more productive, and that gave musicians bargaining power. If an orchestra didn’t pay musicians in line with economy-wide norms, it would constantly lose talent as its musicians decided to become plumbers or accountants instead. So over time, the incomes of professional musicians have risen.

Today economists call this phenomenon “Baumol’s cost disease,” and they see it as one of the most important forces driving the price trends in my chart above. I think it’s unfortunate that this bit of economics jargon is framed in negative terms. From my perspective as a parent, it might be a bummer that child care costs are rising. But my daughter’s nanny probably doesn’t see it that way—the Baumol effect means her income goes up…

A thoughtful consideration of a counterintuitive phenomenon: “Why Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car,” from Timothy B. Lee (@binarybits) in Full Stack Economics (@fullstackecon).

From Baumol himself…

Briefly, the book’s central arguments are these:

1. Rapid productivity growth in the modern economy has led to cost trends that divide its output into two sectors, which I call “the stagnant sector” and “the progressive sector.” In this book, productivity growth is defined as a labor-saving change in a production process so that the output supplied by an hour of labor increases, presumably significantly (Chapter 2).

2. Over time, the goods and services supplied by the stagnant sector will grow increasingly unaffordable relative to those supplied by the progressive sector. The rapidly increasing cost of a hospital stay and rising college tuition fees are prime examples of persistently rising costs in two key stagnant-sector services, health care and education (Chapters 2 and 3).

3. Despite their ever increasing costs, stagnant-sector services will never become unaffordable to society. This is because the economy’s constantly growing productivity simultaneously increases the community’s overall purchasing power and makes for ever improving overall living standards (Chapter 4).

4. The other side of the coin is the increasing affordability and the declining relative costs of the products of the progressive sector, including some products we may wish were less affordable and therefore less prevalent, such as weapons of all kinds, automobiles, and other mass-manufactured products that contribute to environmental pollution (Chapter 5).

5. The declining affordability of stagnant-sector products makes them politically contentious and a source of disquiet for average citizens. But paradoxically, it is the developments in the progressive sector that pose the greater threat to the general welfare by stimulating such threatening problems as terrorism and climate change. This book will argue that some of the gravest threats to humanity’s future stem from the falling costs of these products, rather than from the rising costs of services like health care and education (Chapter 5).

The central purpose of this book is to explain why the costs of some labor-intensive services—notably health care and education—increase at persistently above-average rates. As long as productivity continues to increase, these cost increases will persist. But even more important, as the economist Joan Robinson rightly pointed out so many years ago, as productivity grows, so too will our ability to pay for all of these ever more expensive services.

William J. Baumol, from the Introduction to The Cost Disease: Why Computers Get Cheaper and Health Care Doesn’t

* William J. Baumol

###

As we interrogate inflation, we might recall that it was in this date in 1933 that United Artists released the animated short “Three Little Pigs,” part of the Silly Symphonies series produced by Walt Disney (though some film historians give the date as May 25). A hit, it won the Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film. In 1994 a poll of 1,000 animators voted it #11 of the 50 Greatest Cartoons of all time.

Its song, “Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf,” written by Frank Churchill, was a huge hit and was often used as an anthem during the Great Depression.

Leaning In?…

Barbie, who celebrated her 54th birthday last month, has had more than 130 careers.  Some, of course, command higher wages than others. But what is perhaps surprising is that the price of a doll varies by profession.  Most in the “Barbie I can be…” collection cost $13.99; but some, like “computer engineer” or “snowboarder” can cost two or three times more.  It can’t be the (cheap) accessories that come with each— why should a miniature plastic laptop be valued so much more highly than a chef’s tiny cupcakes?

The Economist‘s “Graphic Detail” explains…

Matthew Notowidigdo, an economist at the University of Chicago, calls it the “Barbie Paradox,” an idea popularised by his colleague Emily Oster in an article last year in Slate. They conclude that price discrimination is probably at work: sellers exploit parental hopes that a girl playing palaeontologist may grow up to be the real thing, so charge more. And the white-collar professions certainly assuage criticisms from the early 1990s when Mattel released talking Barbies that groused “Math class is tough” (which inspired The Economist to publish an in-depth analysis of the pint-sized princess in 2002). Interestingly, there is only a modest correlation between Barbie’s occupations and real-world salaries. Inexpensive pilot dolls are paid quite a lot in life, and despite babysitter Barbie’s moderately high price, she would take home a pittance as a childcare worker.

###

As we put away our childish things, we might send darkly humorous birthday greetings to Samuel Barclay Beckett; he was born on this date in 1906.  A novelist, poet, and theatrical director, Beckett is best remembered as the playwright who created (with Eugéne Ionesco) what Martin Esslin dubbed “The Theater of the Absurd.”  His Modernist masterpieces– Krapp’s Last Tape and Waiting for Godot, for instance had a profound influence on writers like Václav Havel, John Banville, Tom Stoppard, and Harold Pinter.  Beckett was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1969.

 source

Written by (Roughly) Daily

April 13, 2013 at 1:01 am