[HN Gopher] Young people are leaving their jobs in record number...
___________________________________________________________________
Young people are leaving their jobs in record numbers and not going
back
Author : batmaniam
Score : 64 points
Date : 2021-10-30 18:23 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (time.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (time.com)
| wolverine876 wrote:
| If people aren't working, they need money from other sources.
| Where is it coming from? Is there any serious research on that
| question?
|
| If it's spending savings, then the effect is temporary - savings
| will run out and labor supply will increase again. If it's
| spending less, we should see other negative economic effects.
|
| If it's working for themselves, then what are the economic
| implications there? What is the economic impact of a major shift
| to new forms of employment and work? Is it sustainable?
|
| > The burnout of startup culture is common
|
| The article describes many people starting their own businesses -
| that is startup culture.
| ajkjk wrote:
| Many people I know are making so much money (regular money, but
| they're single / not living lavishly so it adds up quickly) in
| tech that they work a few years and then quit for as long as
| they feel like it. They can only be accounted for as half a
| person's worth of workforce if they're only worked half the
| time.
|
| (And really the only reason I think most people don't do this
| is the godawful state of American health insurance.)
| vesuvianvenus wrote:
| Yep. A year ago, I worked 2.5 months, and quit, and the cash
| I had from those 2.5 months kept be afloat for about 9 months
| after leaving the company. Granted, I am super frugal,
| minimalist, and don't have kids/wife.
|
| Now though, I had to take cash out of savings due to vehicle
| mechanical problems + not landing job as quickly as I hoped--
| I've also not interviewed a ton, so I need to play it as a
| "numbers game" again.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| That's what I'm doing. Health insurance hasn't been an issue
| because I generate the correct amount of income to qualify
| for the maximum ACA subsidy. I might get back into the labor
| market come January but haven't decided yet. For now my
| expenses are very low and I could go for years at this burn
| rate no problem. Maybe I'll work a year or two and if the
| pandemic is most over with by then, do a couple of years of
| traveling, which is much less expensive when you're not
| confined to restricted vacation time windows.
| Jorge1o1 wrote:
| >Savings will run out and labor supply will increase again.
|
| This is my pet theory.
|
| One dynamic that I think could be interesting is if enough
| people exit the labor force, and hold out for enough time,
| would it force employers to make concessions in order to re-
| attract laborers?
|
| I already see this happening with always-remote or hybrid being
| thrown around as a perk in the "Who is Hiring" threads and on
| LinkedIn.
|
| Maybe wage growth is finally on the horizon?
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| There's also the other side of the story... some people are
| actually trying to get a job, and are rejected (or more often
| ghosted) by companies that complain alot about not being able
| to get workers.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| If remote work is still seen as an employer provided perk,
| the employer still doesn't get it and likely will do
| something stupid just as soon as they can.
| nine_zeros wrote:
| Americans have an incredible leverage. The dollar goes far in
| other countries. And young people are realizing that. It's far
| too easy to work 6 months, save 10k and then live the next 6
| months in another country for cheap.
|
| There is absolutely no reason to work for abusive companies and
| psychopathic bosses.
|
| If you are sick of your job, quit. There are more jobs available
| than ever in the history of America.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| I don't think that is the reason. I think they are just tired
| of working abusive jobs and struggling than that not work and
| still struggle. There is a shortage of social safety nets
| though so anyone thinking of quitting without some savings
| please make sure you have a plan. Sometimes just getting
| temporary short term assistance can be a full time job in
| itself, and if you had a descent job before be prepared to have
| to interview for entry level crap jobs to keep your assistance.
| Unemployment isn't like it was at the start of the pandemic.
| They took all the supports away while COVID numbers are still
| high.
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| I think Americans are realizing they have more leverage than
| they thought they had, collectively. We'll see how long it
| lasts though.
| deltree7 wrote:
| or they are incredibly short-sighted and assume they can manage
| to survive the next 60 years with whatever meagre savings that
| they may have and whatever skills that is relevant in 2021 is
| still relevant 10 years from now.
|
| If you are in your 20s, you think you rule the world (Thanks to
| validation from Social Media). But those 20 year olds will
| become 30y and they will be the 'boomers'
|
| The cycle will turn, employment will become harder and 'great
| resignation' may come back to bite them.
|
| I'm not saying that this might happen. But to categorically say
| that "This is the way" is incredibly short-sighted
| akudha wrote:
| Most likely this won't last, but it still is a good thing.
| People are realizing they have greater than zero options,
| even if it is minuscule. That realization will help their
| future thinking and choices.
|
| In my case, I don't even consider non remote jobs anymore (I
| have been remote since before COVID). Last time, I moved for
| a job - wasting a few thousand dollars on lease fee,
| relocation expenses etc. I am a little less stupid now
| hh3k0 wrote:
| > Or they are incredibly short-sighted and assume they can
| manage to survive the next 60 years [...]
|
| I'll need you to understand that basically no young person
| assumes they'll manage to survive the next 30, let alone 60
| years.
| thrashh wrote:
| 6 months is not 10 years
| RexM wrote:
| I didn't see anything in the post you're replying to saying
| categorically "This is the way."
| kgin wrote:
| Most of these moves will turn out to be temporary breaks and
| that's ok.
|
| There's a big range of possibilities that live between "never
| work again" and "I can't have even a small gap in my resume
| lest my dedication to capitalism come into question".
| mtalantikite wrote:
| Let the kids go explore the world. Spending 6 months working
| and 6 months traveling in a cheaper place with friends sounds
| great.
|
| It's not like their $15/hr job is ever going to afford them a
| house if they just grind it out for the next 20 years. They
| can use that time for self discovery, learning new things,
| and maybe getting a more stable situation for the future.
| They have every right to demand to be treated with respect on
| the job and to quit if it's shitty.
|
| They have the privilege of a US passport and an exchange rate
| in their favor, might as well use it over the short term. Who
| knows what the world will even be like environmentally when
| they're older and have spent their life doing the "proper
| thing".
| jimbob45 wrote:
| >It's far too easy to work 6 months, save 10k and then live the
| next 6 months in another country for cheap.
|
| _No one is realizing that_. Saving 10k is unbelievably
| difficult unless you 're making extremely good money to the
| point where it's out of reach for the majority of Americans.
| Most Americans can't even stomach a $500 emergency [0] so I
| don't know where you think these people can work such that they
| can have 10k set aside after _six months_.
|
| Furthermore, the actual financial hit of living in another
| country for six months is incredibly difficult. Plane tickets,
| papers, storage (unless you don't want stuff when you come
| back), and taxes aren't just going to pay for themselves. Sure,
| if you make $200k, that's nothing, but the median household
| income in 2020 was ~$60k [1]. It often feels on HN that
| everyone has a $500k job except for me and on Reddit, it feels
| like everyone has a 15-inch dick except for me. The parent post
| makes me feel that same way.
|
| "If you are sick of your job, quit" is terrible advice. You
| should quit your job if you are in a steady-enough financial
| situation to weather being unemployed for an extended period of
| time or if you have alternative employment lined up. Any other
| piece of advice is irresponsible to give to someone else.
|
| [0]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-cant-
| afford-a-50... [1]https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2
| 021/demo/p60-27...
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| >> Most Americans can't even stomach a $500 emergency
|
| Your link doesn't say that. It says that for many Americans,
| if they ran in to a $500 emergency they would put it on a
| credit card, cut back on other expenses, or ask family or
| friends to help them out, rather than paying cash from
| savings.
|
| >> You should quit your job if you are in a steady-enough
| financial situation to weather being unemployed for an
| extended period of time or if you have alternative employment
| lined up. Any other piece of advice is irresponsible to give
| to someone else
|
| I don't agree with that at all. It depends on where you are
| at in life. If you have mouths to feed, or other similar
| obligations, then sure, you need to be careful. If you are 21
| years old without a care in the world and the boss asks you
| to do something that you slightly disagree with, give the
| boss both middle fingers and walk out.
| tamaharbor wrote:
| I guess the unemployment insurance gig works out pretty good. At
| least for a while.
| sagarm wrote:
| You can't collect UI if you quit voluntarily.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| This piece is a good exemplar of the problems with modern
| journalism.
|
| First, let's take a look at the statistics cited in the piece
| which support the main thesis (the whole article is built on two
| facts):
|
| * highest quit rate since .... 2019! 2019, wow, that was like
| ancient history. That makes this _historic_!
|
| * 14 million (what a big number!) of 18-34 not in labor force.
| Isn't that number _so big_? OMG, look at how big that number is!
|
| Whereas the data says both the total not in labor force number
| and the "do not want job" number has _declined_ for all groups
| _except those 55 and over_![1] where it has slightly increased.
| Actually the WSJ got this right when it said the labor story of
| the day is people (primarily small business owners) taking early
| retirement. But then again, that story was written by an
| experienced journalist.
|
| That's it. That's all the labor force participation statistics
| she cites in support of this "Great Resignation". The rest are a
| series of grievances about how bad people have it and how they're
| really not gonna take it anymore! Well, OK, then.
|
| So how could someone write a story with the exact opposite
| conclusion of what the labor force statistics say? Why would
| someone think lying about a "Great Resignation" is responsible,
| objective journalism?
|
| The problem with these type of activist, grievance-based,
| emptional pieces is that they are not news (describing how the
| world is) they are advocacy (describing how the world should be).
| And when you blur those lines, truth and engagement with reality
| is the first casualty. Raisa obviously thinks a great resignation
| is warranted and so just pretends that it's happening. As if her
| own intuition and circle of friends were more reliable than labor
| force statistics. So she disengages with the real world and
| starts pretending that it is actually occurring. She is LARPing
| the news!
|
| And you often see this on the part of frustrated activists. The
| clues are phrases like "people are starting to wake up", without
| any actual data. It's perfectly understandable that this happens
| - lots of people have been secluded, isolated, and are beginning
| to lose it - but when it seeps into news reporting, it's very
| dangerous.
|
| [1] https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htm
| exporectomy wrote:
| That common problem is the arbitrary classification of false
| narratives as good and false facts (fake news) as bad. The
| narrative based journalists can act smug for not directly lying
| but what they're doing is even worse - they're leading people
| to have a deeply held feeling about the world which is false.
| Feelings are more powerful than facts and motivate people to
| protest and vote in large numbers even if it's wrong. But the
| anti-fake-news people suck up the fake feelings gleefully.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Almost all of the parent has no foundation. Describing the
| mindset of the author, with no evidence, is incredible (or, not
| credible).
|
| It's a 'good exemplar' of criticism that, most of all, fits
| perfectly in the cultural trends and moment, pressing all the
| 'right' buttons, triggering all the currently well-conditioned
| emotions, like a great piece of marketing.
| bawolff wrote:
| Arguing that the statistics provided do not (or are
| insufficient) to support the article's main thesis, seems
| like a very reasonable criticism to me.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| The argument goes far beyond that.
| bawolff wrote:
| Hey, i'm just responding to "Almost all of the parent has
| no foundation"
| digikata wrote:
| If you look at a chart of the labor force participation rate,
| it did drop to a low, and has only partially recovered to a
| rate last seen in the mid-late 1970s. That is significant.
| Certainly very different from the rate just previous in 2019.
| Though to really understand it, I think you might have to pick
| apart the data among different age ranges.
|
| https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART/
| rsj_hn wrote:
| Right, but that instant drop was lockdowns. Basically the
| whole nation went into lockdown, then partially re-opened.
| Now you have a partial lockdown situation. E.g. restaurants
| limited to X people, etc.
|
| If she had written a piece that said "the labor force may not
| recover from the lockdowns", then she could gather this piece
| of data and other pieces of data and make a case. But that's
| not the Great Resignation thesis.
|
| FYI, I am not saying that we should not have good labor
| reporting -- now is one of the rare times when labor
| reporting is actually interesting. But not this Time piece. I
| could spend 10 minutes googling and come up with a more
| interesting, more fact base piece of journalism.
| digikata wrote:
| One could interpret the phrase of great resignation a
| little more loosely, not as one of people leaving their
| jobs, but not returning as fast as what is obviously
| expected. But I agree that the data backed research is
| lacking in this article. With a little more time they could
| have done an age breakdown of the participation rate and
| have a much more interesting article with stronger
| conclusions.
| addicted wrote:
| I don't think there's any place in the US that has any sort
| of lockdown.
|
| I think that's been the case for many months now.
| didibus wrote:
| I think the consumer is part of the problem with news. I won't
| lie, I come to hacker news everyday and even multiple times a
| day and refresh hoping to see some new article talking about
| something controversial or new or ingenious. How can you keep
| publishing content like that day after day? At some point, you
| have to inflate things a little, extrapolate, or even enter the
| realm of reporting on hypothetical and what ifs.
| throwawaycities wrote:
| You are downplaying reporting of +5% unemployment in 3 months,
| the difference between now and 2019 is that unlike 2019 those
| persons were either reemployed or counted as unemployed...now
| 14M Americans (aged 18-34) are immediately removed from the
| workforce instead of being counted as unemployed.
|
| You can claim all you want that is not data, but it is and it
| is telling from a policy perspective. Since when have 18-34
| year olds that quit been immediately removed from the
| workforce?
|
| I'll take a guess that you neither are an employer, low wage
| worker or government worker, because you seem pretty far
| removed from the reality facing the vast majority in the US.
| saeranv wrote:
| >> You are downplaying reporting of +5% unemployment in 3
| months
|
| Maybe it is significant, but even if it was the author's data
| provides no context to evaluate the 3.9, 3.9, 4.3 million
| sequence.
|
| >> the difference between now and 2019 is that unlike 2019
| those persons were either reemployed or counted as
| unemployed...
|
| Are you sure? I can't find this particular statement in the
| article. Did I miss something?
|
| >> now 14M Americans (aged 18-34) are immediately removed
| from the workforce instead of being counted as unemployed.
|
| Again, a single number with no context literally says
| nothing! If I came to you and said over the last three months
| our quantity of X increased by 400k from 3.9M, and and
| cumulative X was now at 14M, do you have enough information
| to tell if this is unusually high, low or normal behaviour
| for X?
| shoto_io wrote:
| Beware, strong opinion ahead:
|
| I think the whole resignation story is just nonsense. I am
| almost certain it can be explained by people being worried in
| 2020 so much that they sticked to whatever job they had.
|
| Which leads to... many people quitting in 2021. Surprise! It's
| probably similar to the whole supply chain hickup.
| ozzythecat wrote:
| > I am almost certain it can be explained by people being
| worried in 2020 so much that they sticked to whatever job
| they had.
|
| I think that's a major contributor. Anecdotally, I think burn
| out is another factor. Many of my co workers left, not
| because they would have left in 2020 anyway, but because
| stress and workload increased significantly. Even when the
| overall workload didn't increase, many of my coworkers
| (including myself) were glued to our screens - working non
| stop into the evening, with no sense of boundaries. And for
| many of us, work life balance was already whack. COVID WFH
| just pushed it off a cliff.
|
| I'm highly paid and enjoy the nature of my work, but every
| couple weeks I think about resigning. Honestly, I'm tired. I
| am highly paid, privileged, and have a wonderful boss, but
| sometimes I feel like a cog in a machine. My boss cares about
| me but my company just sees me as a replaceable resource. And
| that's not to disparage my employer. It's just the reality of
| working in corporate America.
| cronix wrote:
| > It's just the reality of working in corporate America.
|
| I think it's just the reality of working for someone else,
| and the longer you do it the higher the chance of
|
| > I feel like a cog in a machine
|
| becomes. There's a lot that comes with getting older, such
| as hindsight. Lots of things felt different when I was
| first experiencing them, vs after 40 (we'll say) years of
| it. You see things differently, because you know more
| through direct experience that can't be taught.
| pwdisswordfish8 wrote:
| > I'm highly paid and enjoy the nature of my work, but
| every couple weeks I think about resigning.
|
| Delegation is the cornerstone of civilization.
| <https://sandstorm.io/news/2015-05-05-delegation-is-the-
| corne...>
|
| Have you considered exploiting work-from-home by
| outsourcing your job (not necessarily overseas, but to
| another eager body that you're able to vet face-to-face)?
| If you're replaceable to your company and you can find a
| replacement more easily and competently than your employer
| can--something that has to be true if the truisms that most
| of HN accepts are actually sound--why not replace yourself
| and benefit from it at the same time by skimming off the
| top?
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| Also a lot of people lost their jobs during the covid crisis,
| and moved out of expensive cities, back to their parents
| houses not-in-manhattan, and because of realestate prices
| being even higher, a lot of them can't afford to come back,
| atleast not at shitty pay rates the most affected industries
| (service, food,...) are offering.
| addicted wrote:
| I'm fairly convinced that the Great Resignation is the sum
| of:
|
| 1) Natural turnover that did not happen in 2020 adding to
| natural turnover in 2021. 2) 2021 natural turnover. 3) People
| (primarily women) not being able to return to work because of
| child and elderly care.
|
| The reason I don't think it's something more than that is
| that other countries are not seeing a great resignation. Only
| the US is. And the US didn't even have struct lockdowns
| unlike other countries including countries richer and poorer
| than the US on a per capita basis.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| > 3) People (primarily women) not being able to return to
| work because of child and elderly care.
|
| I think that one is key, BUT primarily because I also think
| that one is not likely to recede as quickly the other
| causes will.
|
| I think many people with young children, where both parents
| worked, and one of those parents was in a relatively low
| wage job, realized that it actually made more financial and
| "mental health" sense to have that parent just quit and
| take care of their children full time. With as expensive as
| childcare is in the US, people realized "Why am I
| completely stressing myself out, having someone else raise
| my kids, when I earn X, but something in the neighborhood
| of .8X goes to childcare, expenses for having a job
| (commuting, work clothes, etc.), and taxes. I'd rather have
| a slightly lower standard of living without having to deal
| with a bullshit job and having so little time with my
| kids."
|
| I believe _that_ dynamic is one that has staying power. All
| of the other fantasies ( "people are standing up to the man
| and saying they won't come back until wages increase") will
| face reality once people's savings run out and they realize
| they like having shelter and eating.
| im3w1l wrote:
| > Only the US is.
|
| That's a super interesting fact but I don't think it so
| obviously points out that this is a non-event. Why would
| the turn from 2020 add but not in the rest of the world?
| Why would women go home to child/elderly care and not in
| the rest of the world? Pretty mysterious!
| endisneigh wrote:
| I honestly find your response here to be far more emotional
| than the actual article for what it's worth.
|
| >So how could someone write a story with the exact opposite
| conclusion of what the labor force statistics say? Why would
| someone think lying about a "Great Resignation" is responsible,
| objective journalism?
|
| It's not the opposite, though.
|
| In fact nothing you're saying even contradicts what the article
| is saying. Basically your entire criticism is around what you
| perceive the authors intent is in writing the article, which is
| funny given your post.
| saeranv wrote:
| This is a really good critique. I would not have thought to
| read this article as critically as you did, and likely would
| have accepted it at face value. But now that you mention it,
| there's more issues I see:
|
| "This is the highest mass resignation the U.S. has seen since
| 2019, pre-pandemic, and the numbers are still rising. In June,
| 3.9 million quit. In July, it was another 3.9 million. In
| August, 4.3 million."
|
| The [3.9M, 3.9M, 4.3M] sequence seems cherry picked. It could
| just be normal noise for all we know. To me this kind of
| argument could be easily summarized with simple data
| visualization, i.e. a line graph with more datapoints (expand 3
| month range to a full year, stack more years for context). A
| histogram of monthly resignations to attach a %-ile to it would
| also be great, but may not be as intuitive and there's a lot of
| complexity involved in trying to understand significance.
|
| The author follows the monthly resignation numbers with: "The
| numbers are even more notable for young workers: in September,
| nearly a quarter of workers ages 20 to 34 were not considered
| part of the U.S. workforce--some 14 million Americans,
| according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who were neither
| working nor looking for work."
|
| You interpret this as them saying 14M is a big number, but I
| think based on the preceding sentence, it's actually trying to
| say 14M is "more notable" than the ~3.9M in the preceding
| argument. I kind of think this is the case, as its a really
| common data mistake I see in articles: mixing up units. In this
| case of course, out-of-labor/month cannot be compared to
| cumulative out-of-labor-young/month.
|
| That being said, I disagree with you on your attribution of
| this to activist journalism. And for context, I'll just say
| that unlike the vast majority of HN, I actually have a lot of
| respect for most modern journalism, and think most people
| complaining about journalism aren't comparing state of affairs
| in countries like China/Russia/Sri-Lanka without press freedom.
|
| My more generous interpretation is that another underlying
| cause for these kinds of mistakes is simply a lack of
| familiarity with math, and especially statistics. A journalist
| with good intentions can still make these kinds of errors if
| they aren't familiar with good practise in statistics.
|
| Finally, I just wanted to say, there are quite a few
| journalists that are pretty good at data-based journalism. I
| think Kevin Drum[1] is a particularly good example, since he'll
| often refute other articles by digging up more data and
| illustrating how marginal some percieved effect is in context.
|
| 1. https://jabberwocking.com/
|
| ETA: Fixed unit confusion critique mistake, it's not
| resignation but out-of-labor.
| inputvolch wrote:
| All solid points. And so then it makes you wonder why something
| like this:
|
| 1. Gets submitted to Hacker News
|
| 2. Gets voted to the front page by HN readers
|
| It must fit with a narrative that people already are
| predisposed to believe. Maybe that's why the piece gets written
| to begin with.
| Ancapistani wrote:
| HN seems to require that an article be interesting, or spur
| interesting conversations - not that it be well-written or
| even correct.
| bloodyplonker22 wrote:
| Indeed. It's really just the fact that most people don't
| think independently. On HN, there is a greater ratio of
| people who actually use their brain (vs reddit, for
| example), thus there will be comments calling out the
| article's correctness.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| Online "news" needs to get hits and thus make money. Being
| actual news is a far distant priority to that.
|
| People are interested in and believe there is a "Great
| Resignation" even though it's not happening. Why? I don't
| know. But I think this is the actual story - and I wish
| someone would write it.
|
| But "you believe X and it's wrong" stories generally don't do
| well.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| > Online "news" needs to get hits and thus make money.
| Being actual news is a far distant priority to that.
|
| Yeah, I get why Time hires these kids. They fired the
| senior reporters to cut costs and pay peanuts to the
| replacements, many of whom are fresh out of college and are
| morally opposed to the concept of objectivity, when they
| see their role as advocating for some kind of justice.
|
| Why would someone accept such a poor paying job? Because it
| gives them a platform. So part of their compensation is to
| air grievances - to "be heard". To push for justice. That
| sense of fulfillment on the part of the reporter is part of
| the compensation package.
|
| These are the people that self-select into these jobs, as
| reporters who value "being heard" less will expect more
| cash payment. So on the labor supply side, business save
| money by hiring reporters who tilt more towards valuing
| "being heard" and "justice".
|
| But on the demand side, facts have been commodified so much
| with the internet that merely the gathering of interesting
| data and presentation thereof is not highly valued. What is
| highly valued is opinion, especially outrage-inducing bias-
| confirming opinion. That is why you see the rise of
| Buzzfeed and outlets like Time are drawn into that orbit.
|
| It's not good for our body politic, but it makes business
| sense.
|
| > People are interested in and believe there is a "Great
| Resignation" even though it's not happening. Why?
|
| Because the labor market is all screwed up now. Covid and
| the lockdowns have made it completely topsy turvy. So it's
| an area of intense interest, and then -- like the port
| situation -- people project their own bugbears onto that.
| So some will insist that this is some revolt of labor over
| capital, and they follow those stories. Others insist it's
| government mismanagement and follow those stories.
| im3w1l wrote:
| I think you are underestimating "these kids". Getting a
| low paid position position as a powerbroker is not as
| stupid as you think. A frightening thing to consider over
| halloween: If Time wont pay them, someone else might.
| It's a well known that powerful positions with low pay
| are a recipe for corruption disaster.
| olivermarks wrote:
| Worth noting that Time is owned by Benioff and that he is a
| central 'digital' figure at the DAVOS nexus.
| Tangokat wrote:
| I think an interesting datapoint in this discussion is that the
| second fastest growing subreddit (behind /r/announcements) is
| /r/antiwork.
|
| There seems to be pretty strong sentiment out there that the
| minimum wage American worker is not being compensated correctly.
|
| The market is supposed to fix this by adding wage growth and
| maybe it will.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-30 23:01 UTC)