Let's talk about income inequality

[*michaelsean*]

(05-22-2015, 09:27 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: When I think of income inequality I don't think about those without a job, that's a different fight. I don't even think of minimum wage issues because I don't like a federal minimum wage and so do not like to see one being set.

As for the overall topic of income inequality. The topic is more about the widening wage gap and the elimination of the middle class. The CEO v. worker pay has already been brought up, which is a huge talking point in the conversation. But the thing to me is how many people we see out there doing what they were supposed to and still struggling? The reason why we talk about the issue of student debt is because when we started having these student loans they would get out of college and find a decent enough job to support a family, pay down their loans, live in suburbia, etc. Now they get out of college and they are lucky to find a job that pays them enough for living expenses and to pay down their loans.

There are a large number of reasons for all of this. Partly to blame is the rising cost of college increasing the amount of loans being taken out. The aging workforce also has a lot to do with it. Fewer people are retiring at the age when most people used to. This has to do with a need for money but also because with so many being employed in an industry where physical exertion  isn't a requirement they can work longer than someone in a physically demanding job.

There are just a lot of things at play here currently making things very difficult for people trying to make their way in the world. Has nothing to do with laziness, has nothing to do with the minimum wage, but it is creating a society of the wealthy, the poor, and the working poor with no middle class upon which this country has relied for decades.

But with a lot of these giant corporations, where the CEO is making mega-bucks, if you took all his money and gave it to the employees it doesn't amount to much. I looked at Wal Mart, and it came to like $60 a year per employee if the CEO took no money.

[Belsnickel]

(05-22-2015, 10:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: But with a lot of these giant corporations, where the CEO is making mega-bucks, if you took all his money and gave it to the employees it doesn't amount to much.  I looked at Wal Mart, and it came to like $60 a year per employee if the CEO took no money.

Which is why I don't focus on that as an issue. While it is a talking point, and a big one, it isn't a cause of things. It is nothing more than a sign of the situation. A recognizable issue of the underlying problems.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(05-21-2015, 10:20 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Not everybody can become a skilled worker just by "studying harder" there are different levels of intelligence and aptitude across the population. My biggest problem with low paying jobs, is if you work 40/hr weeks it should pay enough money to not have to be on food stamps or Medicaid. A full-time job should pay enough to get you above the poverty line regardless of what the job is.

A lot of our service industry people came from the manufacturing sector after most of those jobs were outsourced over the past 30 years. There just aren't enough well paying jobs for people who got screwed by big business and our government passing free trade agreements and now another one is coming down the pipe.

This. Right. Here.

While I also agree with the gist of what Sunset is driving at, there are those who have been phased out by these ludicrous free trade policies that are designed for nothing more than to line shareholders' pockets. What those shareholders are losing sight of is......if everyone can no longer afford their goods, then how the hell are they going to stay in business? It appears we have forgotten our history lessons. The last time the wealth gap was this large, and wealth controlled by such a small percentage of the population, was near the end of the roaring 20s and the Gilded Age. What happened in October 1929?

I'm not for wealth redistribution......but that's not just a one way street either. Trickle down economic policies implemented in the 80s and moving from fair trade policies to free trade, have essentially redistributed quite a substantial amount of wealth from the middle/working class, right back into the pockets of the elite. At the rate we're going, I'm afraid the masses won't "eat cake" for long......

[fredtoast]

(05-21-2015, 09:27 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I am of the position that feels that the entire movement to get rid of "income inequality" is just a bunch of lazy folks looking for something for nothing.

Yep, that's right, I said it.  If you want to earn more, study more, learn a marketable skill that pays.  

My thoughts are primarily motivated by those that feel the minimum wage should be raised to $15/hr.  I also feel that crowd is a bunch of bozos that should try their hand at jobs that pay better than minimum wage, just to see if they could cut the mustard.

Minimum wage jobs pay the least for a reason.  That reason is because it takes the least amount of skill, experience, or talent to perform those duties.  They feel that $15/hr or 30K (based on a 40 hr. work week) is suitable pay for the least common denominator in terms of employment opportunities.  What those folks do not realize is that even if that were to happen, it would only be a very short lived victory, as inflation would occur, and make their $15/hr. worth about the same as their $7.25 is today.

More to the point; Why should the lowest achievers (for the ones that never move out of minimum wage jobs) and those with virtually no work experience, make as much as people who have worked and studied hard to develop a marketable skill?  30K is about the same as an average starting Teacher or Fire Fighter. (just to put it in perspective)  Does it mean that if minimum wage should be 30K, then all jobs that currently pay in the 30K range should automatically go to 60K?  How would that work?  If everyone got paid a living wage to do menial work, what would the incentive be to study and work hard?  

But it's so unfair that people at the top have all the wealth..  Bullshit.  Try your hand a running a billion dollar corporation, tell me how that works out.  Try getting millions of fans to come and watch you perform on stage, or the big screen, in the stadium, or in the arena.  Likely won't work out so well..  So, basically, you need to get a freakin' education, learn your sorry ass a skill that has a pay grade above minimum, and start plugging along like most Americans that want to live the dream.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/

http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/04/income-mobility-myths

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=25295

I am not rich, likely will never be financially "rich", but I have what I need, and most of what I want in life.  My grandmother made minimum wage until the day she retired, and was the first female to ever graduate from her High School, but it never stopped her from being the happiest person I've ever known.  

Folks, if you want to make more money, then make yourself worth more.  
The bottom line.

Well at least today's generation is not as lazy as the group back in the early 1930's. Almost everyone refused to work back then.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(05-22-2015, 12:16 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: My opinions have been changing about minimum wage. I don't think there should be a national minimum wage. At least not as a set dollar amount, like $15. Costs of living vary dramatically from city to city across the nation. Even within the same state. A person in New York City may need $20/hour just to make rent and buy food. A person in Strawberry, Arizona might be fine on less than $10/hour. Individual cities and counties should be the ones to decide. And that seems to be the trend.

As far as income inequality, it is the violation of the social contract. Poor and middle class people generally don't care how much the rich people are making, until they see decades of rich getting richer while their classes don't improve at all. At that point, they feel taken advantage of. True, the world has changed. Globalization and automation have cut deeply into middle class jobs. The problem is that the rich have adapted to the changing world. It was easier for them because they have the resources to do so. It is a different story for the middle class. There are no replacement occupations, so the mass of people find themselves competing like dogs in a pit for the few remaining decent paying jobs. Now, to a degree, competition is good for everyone. But over-competition is not. And many people in the middle class reject that, particularly when it is forced upon them as a condition for basic survival. There is a feeling the pendulum is weighed to heavily on one side right now.

Frankly, this is a trend that should have been addressed by our politicians decades ago. It wasn't. Uncle Ronnie promised us it would all be okay because of the 'trickle down'. Where did that get anyone in the middle class? Uncle Bill promised better times with the 'peace dividend'. That was spent quickly, and not on the middle class. Uncle W. promised us that all would be okay if we just sent our children off to war and deregulated.

My point here is that no one has had a long term plan for the changing world. That should be no surprise. We are Americans, we don't do long term plans. We are left with one party which is preoccupied with the poor and another which is preoccupied with the rich. Neither speaks for the middle class despite their rhetoric. And private enterprise has no answers. They are preoccupied with their profit margins and bottom lines.

Man, you nailed that right on the head.....

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(05-22-2015, 01:27 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I have a problem with labeling a whole class of people as 'underachieving'. That is a label for a particular individual, not for a group. And especially not for a large group of people like thirty or forty percent of the population. That's absurd. It is a myth to say to everyone that "if you just work hard, you can be successful!". For many people in this country right now, if they just work hard they can stay alive. That's it. Success for them is just staying alive. Opportunities that some, or even most, of us have are not available to all. It has always been that way and it will probably always be that way. But that is no reason to overgeneralize and label people just because they belong to a different class.

BTW- The same goes for labeling all rich people as 'overachieving'. They are not. And some will even tell you that they are not, if you ask.

.....and some are trust fund babies......

[Benton]

Zona pretty well already covered my thoughts.

I will add, though, that one hurdle in 'just go be smarter' is the few million years of breeding where 'just go be stronger' was of more need than an individual's ability to add. When we were nomadic and agrarian societies, the hardiest, healthiest and strongest multiplied more readily. Studies have shown men and women still respond sexually and in mate selection better to those with primal attributes — people whose occupations involve heights, heavy lifting, etc.

Your genes determine your potential. If they determine you aren't going to have the learning capacity for quantum mechanics, then tough luck.

And that lower paying jobs take less "skill, experience, or talent " is silly. Try working one. If those CEOs you mention running billion dollar companies had answers besides reducing the workforce and paying people less, I might agree they were worth what they're paid. But take GM. Their answer to losing money was to lose more money to get funds from the government, and move their product out of manufacturing hubs and hire unskilled workers. The result? GM has produced decades of really, really ****** cars. Which resulted in more loses and more government money. Which meant more cuts, which meant more crappy product, which meant more cuts, which meant more crappy product...

In that never ending cycle of bad management paid for by customers and tax payers, you have executives making hundreds of millions.

That's messed up. It's got nothing to do with innovation, ability, hard work or intelligence — it's cronyism. Why do you think guys like Dick Cheney go back and forth from political jobs that pay nearly nothing to making tens of millions being in charge of companies — because it allows them to manipulate the system for their contemporaries to make money. They make it by changing laws that protect workers and consumers, they make it in the form of no bid contracts, they make it in the form of tax loopholes not available to regular businesses.

I've got no issue with guys who made billions by being smart. Most people don't. Give me a Warren Buffet, Bill Gates or Sara Blakely and I'll agree, those people need to be lauded for their ingenuity and effort.

But a Carly Fiornia (whose answer was to massively cut jobs and tank her company), Ron Johnson (nearly took Apple and Target off track and turned JC Penney from a profitable business with $40 stock to nearly bankrupt with shares at around $10), or mary Barra, the last GM CEO failure who basically pawned off 11 years of internal reports being ignored — which resulted in 13 deaths — as low-level employee responsibility. And nothing was done to the people responsible in management. Those type of executives are what's wrong with the system.

(05-22-2015, 10:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: But with a lot of these giant corporations, where the CEO is making mega-bucks, if you took all his money and gave it to the employees it doesn't amount to much.  I looked at Wal Mart, and it came to like $60 a year per employee if the CEO took no money.

True. But that's only half the story as about half of the country still works at small businesses (200 workers or less). At those types of places, or even ones a little larger, it can make a huge difference. Take...

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/kentucky-state-university-president-gives-90000-salary

"Raymond Burse, the interim president of Kentucky State University, recently gave up more than $90,000 of his salary so 24 employees earning the state’s $7.25 minimum wage could collect $10.25 per hour. The minimum wage rate in Kentucky is the same as the federal amount, which took effect on July 24, 2009."

For those 24 employees, that works out to about $100 per week extra bring home. That's enough for a monthly car payment, a better mortgage, or money to go back to school. To many people an extra $400ish a month isn't going to change their lives. For someone making $7.25, it could.

[SunsetBengal]

Great thread, many good responses, particularly by 'Zona and Benton.

I think that some of you missed the point I was aiming at. Many people want to complain about income inequality, demand that they be paid more money for the lowest forms of employment, yet choose not to make themselves worth more to the job market. It is entirely possible for anyone, even coming from the most dire of circumstances or upbringings to at least elevate themselves to Middle Class. There are all sorts of jobs/professions that pay middle class money, yet do not require a great degree of intelligence or even a 4 year degree. Pretty much anyone can pick a skilled trade, begin as a laborer and rise in rank over time. Pretty much anyone that managed to graduate High School is intelligent enough to complete an Associate's Degree program at a Community College. Heck, if you're broke, you can even go for free in most cases.

America is still the land of opportunity, where anyone that is willing to put in the effort, can achieve success and earn a comfortable existence.

[fredtoast]

(05-22-2015, 01:28 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Great thread, many good responses, particularly by 'Zona and Benton.  

I think that some of you missed the point I was aiming at.  Many people want to complain about income inequality, demand that they be paid more money for the lowest forms of employment, yet choose not to make themselves worth more to the job market.  It is entirely possible for anyone, even coming from the most dire of circumstances or upbringings to at least elevate themselves to Middle Class.  There are all sorts of jobs/professions that pay middle class money, yet do not require a great degree of intelligence or even a 4 year degree.  Pretty much anyone can pick a skilled trade, begin as a laborer and rise in rank over time.  Pretty much anyone that managed to graduate High School is intelligent enough to complete an Associate's Degree program at a Community College.  Heck, if you're broke, you can even go for free in most cases.

America is still the land of opportunity, where anyone that is willing to put in the effort, can achieve success and earn a comfortable existence.

This just is not true. There are not enough well paying jobs for everyone to have one. That is a fact i have pointed out to you before, yet you refuse to admit it. Instead you just repeat the lie that if everyone just worked harder then everyone would be middle class or above. And that is a lie. There are people right now working two jobs to try and support a family.

In a capitalist system you are going to have winners and losers. Everybody can't be a winner. The question is what do we do that is best for the society as a whole. People that already have money are able to manipulate the system and make more money. That is why the government has had to create minimum wage laws and also make laws against monopolies, price fixing, child labor, etc. etc.

Anyone with any knowledge of economic principles knows that the poor are not just poor because they are lazy. That is just the rhetoric that is being fed to the masses by the wealthy elite who want to continue to suck all the money from the middle and lower classes.

Capitalism is the best economic policy, but it needs to be regulated to keep the people at the top from using their power to take everything.

[GMDino]

(05-22-2015, 10:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: But with a lot of these giant corporations, where the CEO is making mega-bucks, if you took all his money and gave it to the employees it doesn't amount to much.  I looked at Wal Mart, and it came to like $60 a year per employee if the CEO took no money.

Its not just about the wage gap.

Yes it is hugely different than even when my dad was working at a factory 30+ years ago...but its also about profits.

Making more has replaced taking care of your employees. One good way to keep that going is to keep up the myth that if they want to make more they have to work harder...while also saying what they do isn't that hard or skilled to require paying them more.

Productivity in this country is amazingly high...by pay is not keeping up with it. we are in a cycle where employees are still afraid of losing even the low wage jobs they can find so they put up with longer hours and more work while getting no increase in pay or benefits.

A company would rather show stock holders that they made another dollar than reinvest that in its workers. Well, most companies. A few still understand that happy employees DO work harder and provide a better product.

But if we could give just one more tax break they'll start paying more and hiring more. Just...one...more...

[SunsetBengal]

(05-22-2015, 01:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This just is not true.  There are not enough well paying jobs for everyone to have one.  That is a fact i have pointed out to you before, yet you refuse to admit it.  Instead you just repeat the lie that if everyone just worked harder then everyone would be middle class or above.  And that is a lie.  There are people right now working two jobs to try and support a family.

In a capitalist system you are going to have winners and losers.  Everybody can't be a winner.  The question is what do we do that is best for the society as a whole.  People that already have money are able to manipulate the system and make more money.  That is why the government has had to create minimum wage laws and also make laws against monopolies, price fixing, child labor, etc. etc.

Anyone with any knowledge of economic principles knows that the poor are not just poor because they are lazy.  That is just the rhetoric that is being fed to the masses by the wealthy elite who want to continue to suck all the money from the middle and lower classes.

Capitalism is the best economic policy, but it needs to be regulated to keep the people at the top from using their power to take everything.

Fred, I totally agree with you on Capitalism, but please do not accuse me of lying.

Yes, there certainly are winners and losers. There are also the lazy and those who are afraid to try. It IS entirely possible for anyone to achieve middle class. Don't believe me? Just take a ride out to some of the construction sites. You will see plenty of Hispanic people that likely came here looking for opportunities and they found them. They likely started out as laborers, now they are foremen, equipment operators, and in some cases the General Contractors. Have you taken a look at the demand for medical professionals? I'm not talking about Drs and RNs, but LPNs, lab technicians, phlebotomists, etc. All of those pay well enough for someone to rise to middle class. You say that there just aren't enough good paying jobs out there? Baloney, just log into the degree course offerings of Community Colleges around the Nation. The job market dictates what programs they are offering. If there is no need for qualified people of a given trade or profession, they discontinue offering that program. It's really very simple.

[Benton]

(05-22-2015, 01:28 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Great thread, many good responses, particularly by 'Zona and Benton.  

I think that some of you missed the point I was aiming at.  Many people want to complain about income inequality, demand that they be paid more money for the lowest forms of employment, yet choose not to make themselves worth more to the job market.  It is entirely possible for anyone, even coming from the most dire of circumstances or upbringings to at least elevate themselves to Middle Class.  There are all sorts of jobs/professions that pay middle class money, yet do not require a great degree of intelligence or even a 4 year degree.  Pretty much anyone can pick a skilled trade, begin as a laborer and rise in rank over time.  Pretty much anyone that managed to graduate High School is intelligent enough to complete an Associate's Degree program at a Community College.  Heck, if you're broke, you can even go for free in most cases.

America is still the land of opportunity, where anyone that is willing to put in the effort, can achieve success and earn a comfortable existence.

For the most part, I agree with the bolded. People can elevate themselves here much better than a large chunk of the world.

I would say that ability is shrinking though. I'm not poking at you here — I think going back and getting an education and a new career is admirable — but you do serve as an example of that. You had a trade, but that market shrunk and you were forced to make changes. Luckily, you had that ability to go back and get an education. For some people, that trade is the best they could hope for.

Most of our industry has moved out. As it does, it decreases those opportunities for people to move up economic classes. Because as those jobs go, so do the other unskilled jobs that depend on them — construction workers, laborers, carpet layers, moving companies, ground keepers, etc. That's what happens when you have a large concentration of wealth at one place. The fewer people buying goods, building houses, getting services, then the less need you have for those occupations and the less they can generate.

In high school I worked construction work with any contractor I could get. I usually made $10-$15 cash as a laborer through the summer and on weekends. That was in the 90s and was about the average here where there was a fairly large chemical industrial complex. Now, 20 years later, the average for a day laborer here is 9-12$. For my area, it's the same as most — local industry shuffled companies around to lay off workers and rehired guys at one half to a third of what they used to pay, which hit everyone's earning potential. Company stocks were up, though.

[Bengalzona]

(05-22-2015, 01:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Capitalism is the best economic policy, but it needs to be regulated to keep the people at the top from using their power to take everything.

My sentiments exactly. Couldn't have said it better.

But, of course, the folks at the top fight regulation for that very reason.

[Bengalzona]

(05-22-2015, 06:14 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: People without a job, obviously.

And people know how to work the system.  There are plenty of people who ***** that could have a job but don't because they think it's beneath them   And even more people sitting around saying "woe is me" because they are unwilling to relocate to where the jobs are.

There are many excuses today that have become acceptable that people would have simply called lazy 20-30 years ago.

Personally, I've always seen "working the system" (or trying to work the system, anyway) as counter-productive.

My brother and I are opposites in this regard. He is always looking for a short cut or a loophole, whereas I almost always take the straight and direct path. He will spend hours trying to think up some 'foolproof' scheme to avoid some work where it only would have taken a half hour to do the job in the first place. He believes he is smarter than me because he does this. In fact, I think that his pride about being seen as smart is his prime motivation. Hence he is willing to ignore the obvious facts that his schemes take more time and effort.

There are other people out there like this. I don't worry about them. From what I've seen, they never get ahead. And when it comes to things like welfare scams or unemployment scams (throw in workman's comp scans too for good measure), those are some of the dumbest scams out there and they typically get caught and exposed. I don't think there are that many people out there "pulling one over" on the government as you may think there are. And when it comes right down to it, no individual scams the government better than businesses.

[fredtoast]

(05-22-2015, 02:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Fred, I totally agree with you on Capitalism, but please do not accuse me of lying.  

Yes, there certainly are winners and losers.  There are also the lazy and those who are afraid to try.  It IS entirely possible for anyone to achieve middle class.  Don't believe me?  Just take a ride out to some of the construction sites.  You will see plenty of Hispanic people that likely came here looking for opportunities and they found them.  They likely started out as laborers, now they are foremen, equipment operators, and in some cases the General Contractors.  Have you taken a look at the demand for medical professionals?  I'm not talking about Drs and RNs, but LPNs, lab technicians, phlebotomists, etc.  All of those pay well enough for someone to rise to middle class.  You say that there just aren't enough good paying jobs out there?  Baloney, just log into the degree course offerings of Community Colleges around the Nation.  The job market dictates what programs they are offering.  If there is no need for qualified people of a given trade or profession, they discontinue offering that program.  It's really very simple.

You have no proof at all of what you claim to be the truth.

The FACTS are that there simply are not enough well paying jobs out there for everyone to have one. Look at the unemployment rate. Look at all the people looking for good jobs. Look at all the people working at the best job they can get and who are still not able to get by without government assistance.

You have just made up a theory in your own head and ignored reality. Learn some actual economics instead of just making stuff up. You think that because there are SOME good jobs pout there that there are ENOUGH good jobs for everyone to have one. That just is not true.

It is not as simple as you think.

[*michaelsean*]

(05-22-2015, 02:41 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Personally, I've always seen "working the system" (or trying to work the system, anyway) as counter-productive.

My brother and I are opposites in this regard. He is always looking for a short cut or a loophole, whereas I almost always take the straight and direct path. He will spend hours trying to think up some 'foolproof' scheme to avoid some work where it only would have taken a half hour to do the job in the first place. He believes he is smarter than me because he does this. In fact, I think that his pride about being seen as smart is his prime motivation. Hence he is willing to ignore the obvious facts that his schemes take more time and effort.

There are other people out there like this. I don't worry about them. From what I've seen, they never get ahead. And when it comes to things like welfare scams or unemployment scams (throw in workman's comp scans too for good measure), those are some of the dumbest scams out there and they typically get caught and exposed. I don't think there are that many people out there "pulling one over" on the government as you may think there are. And when it comes right down to it, no individual scams the government better than businesses.

Your brother is George Costanza?

[*michaelsean*]

(05-22-2015, 02:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You have no proof at all of what you claim to be the truth.

The FACTS are that there simply are not enough well paying jobs out there for everyone to have one.  Look at the unemployment rate.  Look at all the people looking for good jobs.  Look at all the people working at the best job they can get and who are still not able to get by without government assistance.

You have just made up a theory in your own head and ignored reality.  Learn some actual economics instead of just making stuff up.  You think that because there are SOME good jobs pout there that there are ENOUGH good jobs for everyone to have one.  That just is not true.

It is not as simple as you think.

No there aren't enough for people ages 18-65. That's why you start at 18 (if you don't go to school) at a not very good paying job and acquire skills and knowledge. Or maybe you go to one of those vocational schools that advertise all the time. Learn to be an auto mechanic or a welder, plumber, electrician or whatever. You can work those jobs your whole life and make a nice living, and the more ambitious may eventually open their own business.

[Au165]

It really is simple economics. If we pay McDonald's workers 30k then everyone we pay 30k now, who have actual valuable skill sets, must increase proportionally to get back to a salary that demonstrates their superior skill set. Once that adjustment takes place at each earning level you may have shrunk the difference between the very top and the rung just below but not much else has changed. Inflation at that point eventually catches up and we are smack dab back where we were.

It's a noble idea, but one that will always fail.

[Au165]

I will say this however, increases over a long period to catch back up to match inflation would work, but the idea of magically bridging a gap will only result in issues.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-22-2015, 02:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You have no proof at all of what you claim to be the truth.

The FACTS are that there simply are not enough well paying jobs out there for everyone to have one.  Look at the unemployment rate.  Look at all the people looking for good jobs.  Look at all the people working at the best job they can get and who are still not able to get by without government assistance.

You have just made up a theory in your own head and ignored reality.  Learn some actual economics instead of just making stuff up.  You think that because there are SOME good jobs pout there that there are ENOUGH good jobs for everyone to have one.  That just is not true.

It is not as simple as you think.

Fred, plenty of jobs. Jobs for professionals, jobs for skilled, semi-skilled, and lay people.

http://www.glassdoor.com/blog/highest-paying-jobs-demand/

http://fortune.com/2015/01/24/in-demand-jobs-for-2015/

http://www.campusexplorer.com/college-advice-tips/76DB6BDB/Top-25-In-Demand-Jobs-and-Fastest-Growing-Occupations/

http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/rankings

http://www.clarkhoward.com/high-paying-jobs-no-college-degree