California’s Income Growth 1.8 Percent

Where to Find the Fattest Paychecks

California has a fairly high average pay but its growth rate is near the bottom.

Advertisements

14 Responses to “California’s Income Growth 1.8 Percent”


  1. 1 Kaleen Scott September 26, 2009 at 8:23 PM

    I wasn’t aware of the budget cuts until recently. I learned from the school counselors that most universities are rejecting transfer students during the spring semesters due to budget cuts which is putting myself and many other students a semester behind.

  2. 2 Ben Petersen September 29, 2009 at 7:28 AM

    It was said in an earlier article that California alone is one of the World’s largest economic outputters. It would make sense then that we would have a fairly high average pay. What doesnt seem clear is why our growth rate is near the bottom. If we are making so much progress economically, it would only make sense to see our growth rate at or at least near the top.

  3. 3 D. Colin Sorenson September 29, 2009 at 7:40 AM

    I’m surprised that the growth of household income isn’t higher as well. If we are top dog Economically-wise then I’d expect more growth. Especially with both parents, usually, working.

    The one surprising thing in the article, to me, was that Florida was the only state that digressed. Every other state either stayed the same or progressed. Which is good for the economy as long as those darn interest rates stay down with inflation.

  4. 4 Alex Stauffer October 1, 2009 at 11:15 AM

    When they address the fact of cost of living I was happily surprised. This is such an important aspect that I think many people don’t understand. You can always watch shows about the huge houses people live in and the expensive cars they drive, but if your living in Mississippi your 5,000 square foot house is the same price as the 2,000 square foot house that people own in Maryland. For example I live in Healdsburg, California and an the cost of living there is through the roof, my parents would always show me these huge houses we could live in for the same price we pay, but I love my town!

  5. 5 Mike Beretta October 6, 2009 at 2:39 PM

    I am not surprised by this article. I’ve lived in the bay area all my life which has one of the highest cost of living percentages in California. My parents always told me that it is all relative in terms of where you live. Along with higher incomes comes a higher purchasing power, so it seems all the more likely that the cost of living is higher. I don’t understand why an economic downturn gives the median income a boost. Don’t we end up paying in the long run for those people on unemployment? Also, many businesses have moved out of higher cost of living areas (like California), but their employees don’t always go with the company leaving a glut on the job market. It may be good for Nebraska, but I certainly don’t want to move either.

  6. 6 Michelle Benton October 7, 2009 at 1:14 PM

    I think our growth isn’t higher because it takes a lot more money to live in California. I am 30, live in the bay area, and work as a human resources assistant. My father is 58, lives in North Carolina, and works as a helicopter mechanic for three times as many years as I have. We make the same amount of money. The difference is, his money purchases a house, supports my mom and three dogs, pays two car payment w/insurance, pays a multitude of other utilities and bills, and saves for his retirement. My money (every penny pinched)pays ungodly rent on a studio apartment in Vallejo, pays a car payment w/insurance, and maybe if I am lucky a couple utilities. Californians are too busy working for gobs of money that doesn’t get them anywhere. In order to contribute to growth, you have to have money to spend on growing. I spend the same amount on the same things every month and don’t usually “grow” outside that spending box. That is why I think California’s growth level is minimal. Everything is relative….unless you live in the Bay Area LOL.

  7. 7 Rene Martinez October 22, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    This is expected though.

  8. 8 Hyo Kim November 29, 2009 at 4:44 AM

    It is saying CA’s income growth is still the bottom,
    and i just read other news that CA’s college tuition fee is
    one of the highest.
    Isn’t income growth and tax rates has to go together in order to be real stable state?

  9. 9 Evan Schlinkert November 29, 2009 at 12:08 PM

    Like Ben said the article states early on that California is one of the world’s largest economic outputters, and the fact is it would make sense that we would have a high average pay. And the fact is this article really makes sense because if we are making so much progress it seems that there would be a growth rate.

  10. 10 Nubia Cazares December 2, 2009 at 8:21 PM

    This was expected. After all the budget cuts that were made from many schools California’s growth rate is lower then ever. The progress that is claimed to be happening isn’t shown in the growth rate at all. As a government I think they need to see what needs more money and how they can use it to benefit the economy in the long run. How can taking money from schools be a positive things when so much money is instead going to the war? California is one of the richest states but yet has a low growth rate, this is very ironic. As a state we need to increase the growth rate and make a change soon before things start getting worse.

  11. 11 Matthew Abang December 3, 2009 at 12:21 PM

    I was surprised that California was ranked so high in the world’s economies. The state has been a place where innovation has revolutionized technology. We also have the movie capital of the world. Jobs are out there, but they seem to be hiding. Also, we have to pay taxes on those who are unemployed and also for home prices. There are many ways to earn money. Luckily California also has great schools, so there are great opportunities to a great education. This should help people move up the economic ladder.

  12. 12 Kali Hardcastle December 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM

    this kind of makes sense to me in the fact that im from fresno. in fresno we have a lot of agriculture and with that many immigrant workers with low wages. in fresno alone, our range for wages in so different from the lowest to the highest, with a greater concentration in the lower wages compared to the bay area for example, that it makes sense for the average income to be lower than other areas in california. since the central valley is so centered around construction and farming, it makes sense to be that the states average income is going up at a slower rate.

  13. 13 Luke Napier December 7, 2009 at 10:20 AM

    This article sort of shocked me in the numbers that are coming out. Although or country is facing one of the worse financial declines of all time, I would expect this glorious state to have a higher profit. Since we do live in one of the highest living costs in the country, as a state we have so much to offer from our land to our ideas. Putting more money into schools and institutions that provide hope for the future is what our state needs to start concentrating on, instead of spending our money on prisons and ideas that don’t bring a brighter future.

  14. 14 Kyle Ray December 9, 2009 at 12:44 AM

    Our growth rate being so low is pretty astounding to me. California is supposed to be one of the centers of innovation for the entire world (especially the bay area) and here we are creeping along like snails compared to China. Although China is pretty exceptional so I don’t know if thats the best comparison


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s





%d bloggers like this: