The 10 college majors with the lowest unemployment rate

College students, take note: There are at least six fields of study whose graduates are virtually 100 percent employed right now. That’s right–certain majors, such as pharmacology, produce graduates who face a zero percent unemployment rate.

That’s not bad considering last month’s joblessness rate for people with a college degree or higher was 4.4 percent.

The Wall Street Journal created an interactive tool where users can search for the average employment rate and median income of people who studied each major. The data comes from the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce, which released a similar ranking of majors in May that we wrote about here.

The Center’s previous study found that graduates with engineering and science majors tend to earn significantly more many than graduates with other college majors. (A petroleum engineering major will make 300 percent more over his or her lifetime than a peer who majored in counseling psychology, for example.)

But narrowing the results down to only the employment rate yields a wider range of fields that provide excellent job security. People who majored in some lower paying fields, such as school counseling, face an almost nonexistent chance of being unempl0yed.

Check out the rest of the most employable majors, below.

Majors and their unemployment rate:

1. Actuarial Science—0 percent

2. Astronomy and Astrophysics—0 percent

3. Educational Administration and Supervision—0 percent

4. Geological and Geophysical Engineering—0 percent

5. Pharmacology—0 percent

6. School Student Counseling—0 percent

7. Agricultural Economics—1.3 percent

8. Medical Technologies Technicians—1.4 percent

9.Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology—1.6 percent

10. Environmental Engineering, Nursing, and Nuclear Industrial Radiology and Biological Technologies—2.2 percent

Click the article below to see why tuition is growing rapidly.

How tax cuts for the rich push tuition up

Read Full Post »

Patriotic Citizens of Ohio Defeat the Wall Street and the Koch Brother’s Governor John Kasich by Voting to Repeal their Anti-Collective Bargaining Law

Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) said Tuesday night that “the people have spoken” in rejecting the state’s new public employee union law.

With 49 percent of the precincts reporting, 61.8 percent of voters had rejected the law, according to the Columbus Dispatch.

“This vote indicates Ohioans not only support public employees, but they also understand we have been problem solvers and have done so by making more than $1 billion in sacrifices in just the last three years,” said Doug Stern, Cincinnati Firefighter. “We all know it didn’t have to be this way, and it doesn’t have to be this way moving forward.”

Ohio Senate Bill 5 Voter Referendum, Issue 2 would have limited collective bargaining for public employees in the state if approved. Police officers, firefighters, teachers, and other state employees could still negotiate for some benefits, but not wages. Public employees would also be prohibited from striking.

Kasich had said the law was needed to save the state money.

Issue 2 was placed on the November 8 ballot after the pro-labor coalition We Are Ohio delivered nearly 1.3 million signatures to the Secretary of State’s office in June to repeal Senate Bill 5.

“Many Ohioans have been with us since the beginning,” said Courtney Johnson, a public school teacher in Ironton. “From the day we were locked out of the statehouse to the day we turned in 1.3 million signatures, we have felt the support of Ohioans. Tonight we thank you and all Ohio voters for your historic and overwhelming support of collective bargaining rights for Ohio’s everyday heroes.”

Read Full Post »

Ben and Jerry’s Support Occupy D.C. With Ice Cream

WASHINGTON — The Washington offshoot of Occupy Wall Street indulged in some Cherry Garcia and words of encouragement Tuesday from the multi-millionaire founders of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream.

Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield set up a stall in McPherson Square to show their support for Occupy DC, as they drop in on some of the protests against corporate power that have popped up around the United States.

“Today, corporations are essentially controlling our country in their own self-interest,” Cohen told AFP as several dozen youthful occupiers — plus a few homeless men — lined up for a free serving of ice cream.

“They control our elections though campaign contributions; they control our legislation through lobbying,” he said. “They doing very well — and the rest of society is suffering.”

Cohen and Greenfield sold their all-natural Vermont ice cream business in 2000 to the Anglo-Dutch multinational Unilever, which retained social consciousness as a key ingredient of the brand.

Acknowledging his own wealth and business success, Cohen said: “Ben and Jerry’s has proved that a corporation can support the community and use its power to improve the quality of life for everybody, and still make a profit.”

Having previously dropped in on Occupy Wall Street in New York’s financial district, Cohen said he and Greenfield would next be traveling separately to Occupy tent cities in Seattle, Philadelphia and Atlanta.

Their appearance in Washington came a day after police warned they might take a tougher stance towards Occupy DC after scuffles Friday involving police, protesters and participants at a conservative dinner event.

Read Full Post »

In 2009 the typical household headed by someone 65 and older had 47 times as much net wealth as the typical household headed by someone 35 years and younger–$170,494 versus $3,662 (all figures expressed in 2010 dollars).

Households headed by older adults have made dramatic gains relative to those headed by younger adults in their economic well-being over the past quarter of a century, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of a wide array of government data.

In 2009, households headed by adults ages 65 and older possessed 42% more median net worth (assets minus debt) than households headed by their same-aged counterparts had in 1984. During this same period, the wealth of households headed by younger adults moved in the opposite direction. In 2009, households headed by adults younger than 35 had 68% less wealth than households of their same-aged counterparts had in 1984.

As a result of these divergent trends, in 2009 the typical household headed by someone in the older age group had 47 times as much net wealth as the typical household headed by someone in the younger age group–$170,494 versus $3,662 (all figures expressed in 2010 dollars). Back in 1984, this had been a less lopsided ten-to-one ratio. In absolute terms, the oldest households in 1984 had median net wealth $108,936 higher than that of the youngest households. In 2009, the gap had widened to $166,832.

Housing has been the main driver of these divergent wealth trends. Rising home equity has been the linchpin of the higher wealth of older households in 2009 compared with their counterparts in 1984. Declining home equity has been one factor in the lower wealth held by young households in 2009 compared with their counterparts in 1984.

Trends over the same period in other key measures of economic well-being—including annual income, poverty, homeownership, and home equity—all follow a similar pattern of older adult households making larger gains, compared with households headed by their same-aged counterparts in earlier decades, than younger adult households, according to the Pew Research analysis.

These age-based divergences of households widened substantially with the housing market collapse of 2006, the Great Recession of 2007-2009 and the ensuing jobless recovery. But they all began appearing decades earlier, suggesting they are as much linked to long-term demographic and social changes as they are to the sour economy of recent years.

For the young, these long-term changes include delayed entry into the labor market and delays in marriage—two markers of adulthood traditionally linked to income growth and wealth accumulation. Today’s young adults also start out in life more burdened by college loans than their same-aged peers were in past decades, as documented in a recent Pew Research report, a result of income redistribution and Reagonomics. Reagan reduced federal grants and increased student loans so that Wall Street would benefit. Wall Street firms bundled up the student loans and then issued bonds to mostly rich folks. Students paying on their loans forked over money to the rich, whereas they wouldn’t had to have done that with a federal grant.

At the same time, growing numbers are in college, and college education has been found to confer a significant financial payoff over the course of a lifetime, but that isn’t likely to happen in the near future anymore.

Another change is that, compared with young adults in the past, today’s young adults are more likely to be minorities and more likely to be single parents. These characteristics have been linked with lower economic well-being. However, more young women are working than used to be the case, and many young women are postponing childbearing, with its associated costs.

For older Americans, one key change over the past quarter century has been an increase in the share who are employed. The share of adults ages 65 and older who are employed reached an historic low of 10% in 1985 but has since risen to 16% in 2010, because they to because of the Wall Street redistribution policies enacted by congress and every president since Reagan. Meantime, older adults continue to have the advantage of inflation-indexed Social Security as the anchor of their annual income streams, although the government deliberately understates inflation. Today, as in 1984, on average Social Security accounts for 55% of the annual income of households headed by adults ages 65 and older.

Older Americans also have been the beneficiaries of good timing, in the form of the long run-up in home values that enabled them to accumulate wealth via home equity. Most of today’s older homeowners got into the housing market long ago, at “pre-bubble” prices—half purchased their present homes before 1986, according to the 2009 American Housing Survey.5 Along with everyone else, they’ve been hurt by the housing market collapse of recent years, but over the long haul, most have seen their home equity rise. Moreover, most older homeowners (65%) do not have a mortgage to pay.

For young adults who are in the beginning stages of wealth accumulation, there has been no such luck, at least so far. Among those who are homeowners, many bought as the bubble was inflating. When the bubble burst, many were left with negative equity in their homes. But their mortgages were bundled, sold to Wall Street, which in turn issued bonds to the rich backed by the mortgages. This was another income redistribution program.

Wealth Trends

Household wealth is the sum of all assets (house, car, savings account, 401(k) account, etc.) minus the sum of all debts (home mortgages, car loan, student loan, credit card debt, etc.) of everyone living in the household. People typically accumulate wealth as they age, so large age-based disparities on this measure are to be expected. However, the current gap is the largest in the 25 years that the government has been collecting this data.

The widening of the age-based wealth gap hinges mainly on housing, which is the cornerstone of most households’ wealth. However, the fact is that the richest 400 households possess more wealth than the bottom 150 million million people in the USA.

Compared with their same-aged counterparts a quarter-century ago, today’s households headed by adults ages 65 and older are more likely to own a home (79% in 2009 versus 73% in 1984). Overall, older households had 57% more median equity in their homes in 2009 than did households headed by older adults in 1984. Home equity represented a larger share of mean total wealth for older households in 2009 (44%) than for older households in 1984 (39%).

By contrast, households headed by adults younger than 35 had less housing wealth in 2009 than did households headed by younger adults in 1984. These household heads are slightly less likely to be homeowners (38% in 2009 versus 40% in 1984), and home equity plays a smaller role in their overall wealth (31% in 2009 versus 46% in 1984).

The importance of home equity in pushing up the net worth of older American households can be demonstrated by analyzing trends for net worth other than home equity. If it had not been for home equity, the median net worth of older American households in 2009 would have been 33% lower than that of older households in 1984, instead of 42% higher. For young households, there is no such difference: Median net worth in 2009 would be 66% lower than their counterparts in 1984 if home equity is excluded, compared with 68% lower if equity is included.
Income Trends

On another measure of economic well-being—household income—the numbers are less dramatic, but the pattern shows older households again doing better than younger ones, relative to comparable households in earlier years.

Households in all age groups have made gains compared with their predecessors over the course of many decades, but the incomes of the oldest households have risen four times as sharply as those of the youngest ones. As a result, incomes of the oldest households, which have been lower than those of younger households, are catching up.

In households headed by adults younger than 35, the median adjusted annual income in 1967 was $38,555, compared with $49,145 in 2010, an increase of 27% (all figures are expressed in 2010 dollars and standardized to a household size of three). By contrast, in households headed by adults ages 65 and older, the median adjusted annual income in 1967 was $20,804, compared with $43,401 in 2010, an increase of 109%.

The sources of income for households headed by adults ages 65 and older include a steady share of total income, about 55%, from Social Security over the past three decades. Older households also have a rising share of income from wages and salaries, while households headed by young adults have lower shares from wages and salaries, compared with similar households a decade ago. This is a result of shipping jobs overseas, which has consistently hurt working people of all ages, and redistributed their income to the top one percent. When a job paying $50,000 a year is shipped to China, where somebody might earn $3000. When that American job is shipped overseas, the difference between the old pay and the new goes to the rich via profits, dividends and rising share prices. Free trade treaties are the biggest instruments of income and wealth redistribution that the affluent have.

That’s we have the best congress, president and corrupt corporate wing of the supreme court that money can buy.

Poverty

Median income is a measure of what is happening in the middle of the population. Poverty statistics reflect what is happening at the bottom, and they tell a familiar story of changes in economic status for young and old.

Among households headed by adults younger than 35, the share with income below the poverty line has jumped since 1967. Among households headed by adults ages 65 and older, the share living below the poverty line declined.

In 2010 11% of households headed by adults ages 65 and older were in poverty, compared with 33% in 1967.

Poverty rates for households headed by adults younger than 35, meanwhile, began climbing in the 1980s and today are nearly 10 percentage points higher than what they were in 1967. Among households headed by an adult younger than 35, 22% were in poverty in 2010, compared with 12% in 1967.
The Great Recession

Although the economic well-being gap between young and old has been widening for decades, the economic turbulence of recent years has accelerated these trends.

Looking at changes from 2005 to 2009, all households had lower median net worth. But the decline for households headed by younger adults was much steeper.

For households headed by adults ages 65 and older, median net worth in 2009 was 6% below that of the oldest households in 2005. For households headed by adults younger than 35, median net worth was 55% less than that of the youngest households in 2005. (Of course, the 2005 wealth base of young households was so small that even a small decline would have a large percentage impact.) Another notable change for younger households during this period is that the share with negative or no net worth rose from 30% in 2005 to 37% in 2009.

The same pattern holds for household income, for which data are available through 2010. In 2010, the adjusted median income of the oldest households was 8% greater than that of the oldest households in 2005. For the youngest households, however, adjusted median income was 4% less than it had been for the youngest households in 2005.
About this Report

The report describes trends over time for households headed by different age groups in wealth, housing, income and other measures of economic well-being. The two main data sources for this report are both from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The wealth data, including homeownership trends, are drawn from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), a panel survey that began in 1984 and for which the most recently published data are from 2009. The report includes some comparisons from 2005 to 2009, a period that approximately reflects the impact of the Great Recession. The national economic downturn, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, ran from December 2007 to June 2009. SIPP has periodically collected wealth data since 1984 and is considered an authoritative source on the wealth of American households. As with any survey, SIPP estimates are subject to sampling and nonsampling errors.

The income and poverty data for 1967-2010 (reflecting responses from survey years 1968-2011) are drawn from the Annual Social and Economic Supplements to the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey.

Dollar amounts are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2010 dollars.

Following convention, this report’s wealth figures are measured at the household level and do not reflect any adjustments for the size of the household.

The household income figures are adjusted for the size of the household, details of which are explained in the appendix.

The poverty measure is the official federal poverty measure, and as such takes into account not only the size of the household but also the nature of the family members (the number of children and age of the householder). Poverty is typically reported for individuals. Since most of the report focuses on the economic well-being of households, the report presents the poverty status of households based on the status of the household head. So, for example, the report shows the poverty rate of households headed by adults ages 65 and older, not the poverty rate of adults ages 65 and older.

The trends in wealth begin with 1984 simply because that is when the SIPP wealth data collection began. In terms of the business cycle, 1984 was a recovery year following the 1981-82 recession, while 2009 could be construed as a recession year because the recession officially ended in June 2009 according to the NBER business cycle dating committee. While recognizing that 1984 and 2009 are at different points in the business cycle, the trends observed in economic well-being across age groups are also apparent between 1984 and 2005 (two years that are more similar in terms of the business cycle).

The trend is obvious. Government polices have been used to redistribute the future of America’s young to old rich white people who have enough money to buy senators and presidents.

Read Full Post »

Occupy Wall Street Plans Long Distance March to Protest the Wall Street Controlled Congressional Deficit Reduction Super-Committee Keeping of the Bush Tax Cuts

Occupy The Highway: The 99% March to Washington

Posted 21 hours ago on Nov. 7, 2011, 5:30 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

On November 23rd, the Congressional Deficit Reduction Super-Committee will meet to decide on whether or not to keep Obama’s extension to the Bush tax-cuts – which only benefit the richest 1% of Americans in any kind of significant way. Luckily, a group of OWS’ers are embarking on a two-week march from Liberty Plaza to the Whitehouse to let the committee know what the 99% think about these cuts. Join the march to make sure these tax cuts for the richest 1% of Americans are allowed to die!

The 20 mile a day/2 week march from Liberty Square to DC is set to leave this Wednesday, November 9 at noon. On Wednesday we’ll be leaving Liberty Square and marching to the New York Waterway/Hudson River Ferry and onward to Elizabeth, NJ. This is our first stop. Everyone is welcome to join this two week march. If you’d like to participate, but can’t commit for two weeks you’re welcome to join us for the day or help send us off!

The march is being organized at OWS. OWS will be in DC by Nov 23 for the Congressional Super Committee meeting. This committee has the power to keep the Bush tax cuts (that only benefit the top 1%) or let them expire. We want to be there to fight for the 99%! We will also be connecting with Occupy Philly and Occupy Baltimore along the route, and, of course, Occupy DC!

A major draw for this march is to encourage more people in rural communities to get involved as well as bring spreading the word along the highway. OWS is hoping people will join the march along the way; whether for an hour, a day, or the full two weeks. OWS feels its imperative for OWS to be involved in the historical significance of long distance marches to support, promote, and encourage economic and social equality. We will be walking from 9am to to 5pm (banker hours) and will hold nightly GA’s and/or discussions at 7pm in each town where we camp. We will be spending two days off at Occupy Philly and Occupy Baltimore. We are hoping a few people from these occupations will join us in the march to the White House and Occupy DC!

The route is as follows:

11/9/11: Liberty Square to Elizabeth, NJ
11/10/11: Elizabeth, NJ to New Brunswick, NJ
11/11/11: New Brunswick, NJ to Trenton, NJ
11/12/11: Trenton, NJ to Andalusia, PA
11/13/11: Andalusia, PA to Occupy Philly
11/14/11: DAY OFF AT OCCUPY PHILLY
11/15/11: Occupy Philly to Wilmington, DE
11/16/11: Wilmington, DE to Newark, DE
11/17/11: Newark, DE to Rising Sun, MD
11/18/11: Rising Sun, MD to Bel Air, MD
11/19/11: Bel Air, MD to Occupy Baltimore
11/20/11: DAY OFF AT OCCUPY BALTIMORE
11/21/11: Occupy Baltimore to Laurel, MD
11/22/11: Laurel, MD to Occupy DC
11/23/11: Occupy DC to The White House for Super Committee meeting

Read Full Post »

NYCLU: ‘Occupy Rochester’ protesters arrested for breaking ‘unconstitutional ordinance’

The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) called Monday on Rochester mayor Thomas Richards to immediately halt the enforcement of a city ordinance that is being used to restrict “Occupy Rochester” demonstrations in Washington Square Park.

“The city’s crackdown on ‘Occupy Rochester’ demonstrations shows a disturbing disregard for the constitutionally protected right to protest,” said KaeLyn Rich, director of the NYCLU’s Genesee Valley Chapter. “Mayor Richards must use his authority to accommodate peaceful protest and stop enforcing local ordinances that violate people’s First Amendment rights.”

More than 50 “Occupy Rochester” protesters have been arrested for violating the city’s park law.

The ordinance is unconstitutional, according to the NYCLU, because it gives the Commissioner of Recreation and Youth Services unbridled discretion to decide whether the public park should remain open or closed after normal operating hours.

The group is also alarmed by reports that the Rochester Police Department told protesters to “keep the signs to a minimal.” The order was possibly a reference to a city ordinance that requires any person who seeks to display a sign in a public park to obtain a permit.

“The First Amendment sets the floor, not the ceiling, for free expression,” Rich said. “We hope that city officials will embrace free speech and stop enforcing these unconstitutional ordinances. If they choose not to, we are confident the courts will protect protesters’ First Amendment rights.”

Rochester is the first and only city in the state of New York to shut down an “Occupy” demonstration in a public park.

Mayor Thomas said in late October he supported citizens’ First Amendment rights, but that it was the city’s duty to uphold policies that ensured public health, safety and access.

Read Full Post »

Seniors block busy Chicago street to protest cuts to Social Security and social programs, despite a $2.6 Trillion Social Security Surplus

Chicago police on Monday issued citations to 43 senior citizens and their supporters who linked arms to block an intersection near the city’s financial district.

The action was part of a protest against proposed cuts to Social Security, Medicare and other benefits.

The Jane Addams Senior Caucus (JASC), their supporters and “Occupy Chicago” began the demonstration with a rally outside the office of Illinois Sens. Mark Kirk (R) and Dick Durbin (D). The group, which organizers claimed was nearly 1,500-strong, then marched to the Federal Plaza.

Traffic at the intersection of Jackson Boulevard and Clark Street was blocked for about an hour, according to the Chicago Tribune.

“At every level of society, Americans are under attack,” said Karen Bocker, an “Occupy Chicago” participant and grandmother of four.

“When the economy tanks, social programs are cut, not corporate tax breaks. We are under attack, and frankly, I’m tired of it. The very people who are hurt most from cuts to social services – services that our tax money are supposed to guarantee – are those who can least afford it.”

The protesters were joined by Durbin, and Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D), Danny Davis (D), and Mike Quigley (D) in the morning.

Think about this fact. The Social Security Trust Fund has a $2.6 Trillion surplus. The federal government has borrowed it by selling the trust fund treasury bills. The trust fund is earning about $118 billion dollars a year from its investment in those treasury bills. So what’s the problem? The answer is the Bush tax cuts for the rich. At some point the federal government is going to have to pay back the trust fund to the tune of $2.6 Trillion. That might mean raising taxes on the rich, or letting the Bush tax cuts expire. In other words, the Bush tax cuts for the rich forced the government to borrow a shit load of money from the Social Security Trust Fund. Rather than raise taxes on the rich by letting the Bush tax cuts expire, President Obama and his Corporate Cronies in Congress have decided to cut Social Security payments to impoverished seniors. In other words, cuts in social security are being used to redistribute income from impoverished seniors to the rich. Thank you President Obama!

Watch video, courtesy of independent YouTube reporter John Sheehan, below:

Read Full Post »