Nationally in 2010, the tech industry paid an average annual wage of $86,800. That beats the average private sector wage of $45,000 by 93 percent.
That's reason #1 South Dakota should try to reverse its tech-sector job decline. Make it possible for more South Dakotans to nearly double their income-earning potential, and we may finally leave our long-standing position as the state with the highest number of people working multiple jobs.
South Dakotans should not take our high rates of holding multiple jobs as a point of pride. We should take multiple jobs as a sign that too many employers in South Dakota stay afloat by paying their employees too little...
...or nothing at all. The new Deadwood Mountain Grand Casino recently solicited area school teachers to come volunteer as ushers at their Beach Boys concert. The price of paying one worker minimum wage for the required five and a half hours of ushering would have been covered by the price of one $49 concert ticket.
Economic morality calls on those of us who are able to earn our keep. But it also calls on us to pay the people who work for us a living wage.
"South Dakotans should not take our high rates of holding multiple jobs as a point of pride. We should take multiple jobs as a sign that too many employers in South Dakota stay afloat by paying their employees too little…"
Your cited "cause" might be true here in South Dakota, but what about Minnesota? Why are they shaded blue in this map (worst, along with us)? How about Texas, notorious for its low pay scale? Why are they light gray (best, along with Mississippi, of all places!)?
The thing about that map that really strikes me is the geographic disparity. The farther north you go, in general, the worse it gets. Heating bills, maybe?
Cori,
Just looked a a Transunion Financial Services report on personal credit card debt. Iowa has the lowest individual credit card debt in the nation with North Dakota, 2nd and South Dakota 3rd.
Perhaps it is because people in South Dakota prefer to work second jobs to buy I pods, X boxes, playstations,ect, the wants in life instead of using credit cards. Could it be that working a second job is something to be proud of?
Joseph G Thompson
Being a conservative state probably has something to do with it, but South Dakota is also 44th in salaries as of the 2000 census, so also stands to reason they are offered less credit.
Joseph, that is an interesting alternative view. If we have more folks choosing to work more hours rather than rack up credit card bills, I'd say that's good. And if those extra wages were going primarily toward wants, then once again, no problem. But if those second paychecks are covering needs, then we have issues. I wonder if we can get data on the motivations and spending habits of those multiple-job-holders.
John: good point about lower income and lower credit offers.
Stan: Heating bills? I wonder. We can get annual cost of living index comparisons from South Dakota's economic development website In 2010, our cost of living was 98.5% of the national average. By category:
--Housing: 93.8%
--Utilities: 99.1%
--Misc. Goods and Services: 102.8%
Miscellaneous: are XBoxes more expensive here?
Utility costs in other states with high multiple job rates as percentage of the national average:
--Nebraska: 94.3
--Iowa: 93.9
--Minnesota: 109.7
--North Dakota: 74.3
--Montana: 90.0
--Wyoming: 93.6
--Idaho: 94.0
Those numbers suggest that if there's something out here on the Plains that push us to seek more supplemental income, its not utility bills. Next suspect; transportation?
Beg to differ with John's statement that lower wages equates to low credit limits equates to having to work 2 jobs. Iowa and Minnesota both have higher income than S.D. but have a large number of citizens working 2 jobs.
Could you possibly define for this poor old ignorant soul what you mean by "economic morality" and where it comes from?
Joseph G Thompson
There are plenty of great paying jobs in SD, but there are also people whose primary job can't keep up any longer and if they want that different vehicle or get that kid through college, they need to work more hours at places like Lewis, Pamida, a convenience store or the nursing homes.
Economic morality: the idea that, just as businesses expect us to pay a fair price for the goods and services we buy, workers should expect businesses to pay a fair wage for their labor. Prices are always hard to fix, and some labor deserves more compensation than other labor, but at some level, it seems that people who take eight hours of their day away from their family, leisure, and freedom in order to perform honest work for others deserve sufficient compensation to allow them to survive. That's a vague moral formula with lots fo caveats and what-ifs, but it's a starting point for discussing "economic morality."
Could you give me some examples of what labor deserves more compensation than other labor. Does a person who works 70 hours a week running a business deserve more compensation than an employee who works 40 hours? What is suffiecient income to allow them to survive? Would guess that there a people who would consider my income insuffiecent to live on but there are many others who believe I am getting too much.
Joseph G Thompson
Economic morality sounds like a fairly tale. Businesses charge what the market will bear and pay the lowest salaries possible for the best bottom line. Joe, I didn't connect those 3 dots. Just saying our credit balances are lower because we have less income. Are South Dakotan's more sensible money managers? Would like to agree, but show me the data.
John,
Show me the data that says they are not better money managers. I know some people that like money,but don't like debt so they work two jobs.
Joseph G Thompson
Making assumptions without data is a dangerous position.
You are so correct.
I didn't say turning "economic morality" into a practical wage scale would be easy, Joseph! :-) That is a big part of why even I am willing to let the market make a lot of decisions for us. We aggregate thousands of judgments from millions of people and hope that distributes goods and services as efficiently as possible. For the most part, the system works pretty well. But the collective judgment of millions of people makes mistakes just like the individual judgment of you, John, me, and everyone else.
One person flips burgers for eight hours. Another turns bolts on four hundred truck engines on an assembly line for eight hours. Another teaches French to high school students and writes lesson plans for eight hours. How much pay does each worker deserve?
And complicate that calculation with this question: the burger chef is single. The French teacher supports a wife and one child. The assembly lineman has a wife and five kids. Do those facts affect how much we should pay each person?
That my friend is the real world. Not the world of liberal thoughts and beliefs but the real world that we live in. It is easy to say what, in ones opinion should be, but quite another to develope and impliment that idea. The idea of from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs isn't very practical in a society that is unable to differeniate between want and need and whose needs and wants differ significantly with each individual.
Joseph G Thompson
Joe, I work a heckuva a lot more than 70 hours a week right now. My wife and I probably average that throughout the year.
A couple of observations about money:
1. A $15 sports memorymate order will cause you more stress from an unhappy customer than a $5000 wedding ever will.
2. The less money a family has the more important pictures are to them.
This map shows South Dakota is toward the bottom of bankruptcy: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/state-bankruptcy-filings-statistics-1276.php
Thank you Mike. I know you put in many hours to insure that your business is successful. Is it "economicaly moral" for the government to take your money and give it to someone who, by choice, only works 40 hours a week or less?
John, would say that if South Dakotans have lower credit card balances and fewer bankruptcies but work longer hours, the data seems to be suggesting that they are probably making an effort to be better "money managers".
Joseph G Thompson
I see many people trying to justify their existance rather than doing actual work and accomplishing goals. They would rather be a roadblock than contribute. I can't figure out if it is incompetence or laziness that drives them.
Ah Mike, that is a whole different conversation. Most times it is neither incompetence nor laziness but attitude. One day when you are not doing much, give me a call and I will buy you lunch and we will have that conversation.
Joseph G Thompson
There are always going to be deadbeats who do the least amount to get by, but what's going on with our economy right now is so far beyond that. There are huge numbers of good people who are unemployed and our social nets have helped them. It can't go on forever though or we'll be entirely broke or Joad families will be wandering the country.
The problem is that it is many of the deadbeats who have the best jobs and the most power. My estimate is 10-20% of the best jobs have the worst people in them.
I would like to know what beverage gives Mike and Joseph that rosy picture of the world that they have. My Diet Rite cola isn't doing it.
First, Cory's original post is about people who work more than one job. It strikes me as odd to assume that these people are lazy and refuse to contribute.
Second, most people I know who work less than 40 hours a week for an employer because the employer limits their hours. They'd be willing to work more, but the employer won't schedule them to avoid contributing an extra benefit like health insurance. Just as some people are lazy, some employers exploit their workers.
Third, I agree that a business owner who puts in 70 hours should get more than an employee who puts in 40. That being said, many of the people working second jobs are putting in 60+ hours a week for a compensation that doesn't come close to covering the sacrifice. I grew up on a farm and I admit that we would have considered a 40 hour week a luxury, but work time then was also family time. Work time now is only family time if one can earn enough money to afford to take time off.
Finally, I hope Michael lets me know where all of these good paying jobs in SD are. I've got several recent college graduates telling me they can't find any full time work in state.
Another conversation Mike. Best jobs and most power are merely perceptions. You are aware of my background and I will tell you that the best and most satisfying job I ever had was the years that I spent at the Courthouse, a job many people would look down their noses at. The only people that have power over you are the ones that you choose to allow to have that power.
LK,
I do not assume people who work more than one job to be lazy, quite the contrary I salute their desire to better themselves.
Can't argue with your statement that some employers exploit their employees. Worked a short time for some of those myself, but only a short time because I refuse to be exploited.
Jobs in South Dakota, yeah there are plenty of them. Check out the Madison Daily Leader. Do they require college degrees? No,but there are jobs and no one should be ashamed of any type of honest work.
Only thing I drink is water, no kool aid, no soda. Life is what you make of it and I choose to make my life good, has not always been easy but it has always been a challenge and it has always been fun. I do not permitt negative people to be in my world and I have no answers only questions.
Joseph,
Just a couple of clarifications--
Never accused anyone of drinking the kool aid. I reserve that phrase for people who do nothing but spout the party line.
I appreciate optimism but I see storm clouds on the horizon. John Hess earlier alluded to the Roads. I think we"re approaching a time that will make the Joads' life look pleasant. The wage gap and the fact that more and more people have to do more just to stay ahead takes my optimism.
LK,
I am not optimistic about the future of this country either, but my pessimism is fueled more by people who believe that they are entitled to someone else's property merely because they were born here than by people who willing do any job or are willing to work two jobs to support their family.