best kids gadgets 2010 image
Q. Regarding the whole daycare debate, women always argue that they can't afford to stay at home because they need two paychecks...which is true. But why is it that prior to about the 1970s or so most families got by fine with only the father working? What changed in the economy or society to demand that the vast majority of families have two wage-earners?
Answer
The income distribution has changed, Average real (inflation adjusted) wages for men in non supervisory jobs peaked in the 1970's and has only wobbled around since then. What increases in total compensation there has been was eaten up by the cost of benefits, especially employer provided heath insurance. However the wages of the top 20% of earner have increased substantially and they they determine peoples expectations of what constitutes the "good" life. Houses are now bigger filled with more gadgets, families have two cars instead of one, more people send their kids to college, heath care can do more to make you healthy so we buy more of it, etc. To fill the gap between expectation and incomes wives went to work. And since now the majority of families have two earner, this standard of living has become the new normal.
However during this period the real GDP per worker has increased buy more that 50% because of increases in average productivity, and if the current national income were distributed the way it was in the 1970's the median income would be amount $10.000 more per year. The high earning tech worker and professionals got their share of the extra income, but the top 1% who earn over $300,000 a year increased their share of income from about 11% to 24% and much ot that went to the very hing income group, the top 1/10 % now earn over 1.2 million a year some of them getting 100's of millions.
see http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2010/12/29/highest-paying-jobs-in-the-us-2005-2/
Edut. Changes in the tax laws are also partly responsible for the increase in the number of mothers of young children who work. In order to work they must pay someone to care for their children, so the look at marginal tax rates on the additional income and cost of child care, to decide whether working is worth it. In the 1960's there was no deduction for child care expenses and the tax rates for married couples were not much different than for singles
The income distribution has changed, Average real (inflation adjusted) wages for men in non supervisory jobs peaked in the 1970's and has only wobbled around since then. What increases in total compensation there has been was eaten up by the cost of benefits, especially employer provided heath insurance. However the wages of the top 20% of earner have increased substantially and they they determine peoples expectations of what constitutes the "good" life. Houses are now bigger filled with more gadgets, families have two cars instead of one, more people send their kids to college, heath care can do more to make you healthy so we buy more of it, etc. To fill the gap between expectation and incomes wives went to work. And since now the majority of families have two earner, this standard of living has become the new normal.
However during this period the real GDP per worker has increased buy more that 50% because of increases in average productivity, and if the current national income were distributed the way it was in the 1970's the median income would be amount $10.000 more per year. The high earning tech worker and professionals got their share of the extra income, but the top 1% who earn over $300,000 a year increased their share of income from about 11% to 24% and much ot that went to the very hing income group, the top 1/10 % now earn over 1.2 million a year some of them getting 100's of millions.
see http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2010/12/29/highest-paying-jobs-in-the-us-2005-2/
Edut. Changes in the tax laws are also partly responsible for the increase in the number of mothers of young children who work. In order to work they must pay someone to care for their children, so the look at marginal tax rates on the additional income and cost of child care, to decide whether working is worth it. In the 1960's there was no deduction for child care expenses and the tax rates for married couples were not much different than for singles
Why is or now was Jake Locker the top QB prospect in th 2010 NFL draft?
Ramus
I dont understand how he is the top player when he never went to a bowl game, national championship game, no college awards, not involved in the heisman race. I didn't even know who he was until yesterday on ESPN.
Answer
It is called tools. He has the best set of tools such as arm strength, mechanics, ability to read progressions, footwork, pocket presence,etc, etc. etc.. Did you know who Matt Ryan was before he became the 3rd overall pick a couple years ago? He won pretty much the same pile of awards as Locker. Or how about Joe Flacco? He went 18th overall and never even played on a national tv game let lone win any awards. But I bet you have heard of Troy Smith who won a Heisman and 7 other major awards and played in a National Championship game. He also went as the last pick in the 5th round...behind 8 other QBs including such notables as Jeff Rowe (Nevada) and was so bad in camp that the Ravens traded up to pick Flacco the very next year. Graham Harrell was a Heisman candidate and record setting QB, challenged for and won several awards and went undrafted (he has gracefully landing in the CFL....as a backup). The NFL is a tools game and most of the kids who compete for major awards play for dominating schools where the talent at every position is usually better than the opponent...that usually makes ones resuts inflated. Or they play in gadget offenses (spread) where they utilize the talent differentual to their advantage....wont work in the NFL as has been proven time after time. Jake Locker offered the best set of tools to be a top player in the NFL. He also announced he will return for his senior year so none of this really matters anymore. Jimmy Clausen has not done any of the major award stuff either but is now widely considered the best prospect coming out by all the scouting bureau's (and most of the so called draft experts).....he has the tools scouts look for.
It is called tools. He has the best set of tools such as arm strength, mechanics, ability to read progressions, footwork, pocket presence,etc, etc. etc.. Did you know who Matt Ryan was before he became the 3rd overall pick a couple years ago? He won pretty much the same pile of awards as Locker. Or how about Joe Flacco? He went 18th overall and never even played on a national tv game let lone win any awards. But I bet you have heard of Troy Smith who won a Heisman and 7 other major awards and played in a National Championship game. He also went as the last pick in the 5th round...behind 8 other QBs including such notables as Jeff Rowe (Nevada) and was so bad in camp that the Ravens traded up to pick Flacco the very next year. Graham Harrell was a Heisman candidate and record setting QB, challenged for and won several awards and went undrafted (he has gracefully landing in the CFL....as a backup). The NFL is a tools game and most of the kids who compete for major awards play for dominating schools where the talent at every position is usually better than the opponent...that usually makes ones resuts inflated. Or they play in gadget offenses (spread) where they utilize the talent differentual to their advantage....wont work in the NFL as has been proven time after time. Jake Locker offered the best set of tools to be a top player in the NFL. He also announced he will return for his senior year so none of this really matters anymore. Jimmy Clausen has not done any of the major award stuff either but is now widely considered the best prospect coming out by all the scouting bureau's (and most of the so called draft experts).....he has the tools scouts look for.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment