Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr
I think what was said is that 70K a year is not an abnormal salary. It's well within the range of the third quintile for income distribution for households meaning that about 30-35% of all households would qualify. Drop it to 60K and you're talking over 40% of the populace. This ignores other variables such as dual versus single income, age, etc. but it's not the narrow band that Bunt portrays- but he does seem to have a soft spot for the other 60% thinking that they should have opportunities as well ignoring the fact that we're in a new gilded age and social equality is so passe. The populace seems to agree since we're well on our way to President Trump's vision of 'merica.
Environmental firms aren't hiring- blame the downturn in pretty much all extractive industries due to low commodity prices. Permitting work has dried up for the time being and compliance is being treated as the wart that it is- tolerated but not liked at all.
|
HOUSEHOLDS. You can't ignore those other things. We are not talking about households, we are talking about center city housing, which is overwhelmingly one bedroom and studio units. So the relevant statistic to look at is individual income, since the only household types that are really options are individual earners or co-habitating individual earners. Median household size in Denver is still 2.27, but it's much lower downtown, so you basically have to subtract out all family households from the analysis. When we do that, well, median annual salary for full-time working men in Denver is around $52k; it's under $43k for women.
So yes, a $70k individual salary is unusual. Unless you run in upper-middle-class white circles, which most of us here do. Then it actually seems underpaid. (That's a first year associate attorney salary.) But we are not normal.
Threaded Mode