Jump to January 2012 archive page: 1 2
  • Cheat on taxes? Never! Or, as much as possible

    IRS Oversight Board

    Here’s the good news for Uncle Sam: The vast majority of Americans still believe that you should never cheat on your taxes — or, at  least, that's what they tell the pollsters representing the Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board.

    The bad news: The percentage of people who say you should cheat on your income taxes “as much as possible” hit 8 percent in 2011, double what it was in 2010. That’s also higher than any other recent year in which the question was asked.

    Another 6 percent of those surveyed said a little cheating here and there is OK.

    The oversight board this week released its annual survey of taxpayer’s attitudes about the IRS. The survey was conducted by an outside research firm in August.

     

    For the most part, despite our grumbling, Americans seem to at least accept that taxes are a necessary part of life. Almost everyone surveyed agreed that it is every American's civic duty to pay taxes, and most people said they thought tax cheats should be held accountable.

    Still, that doesn’t mean we all feel the need to be the tax police. About six in 10 people said people have a personal responsibility to report tax cheats.

    Americans also seem to think we should pay our fair share of taxes because it’s the right thing to do. Most people said their “personal integrity” had a great deal of influence on whether they report their income honestly.

    Other factors, such as a fear of an audit, seemed to have less influence.

    Related:

    Tax time is coming, turn on the computer

    Procrastinators rejoice: Tax deadline extended

     

     

    Show more
  • Consumers use phones as weapons in hunt for bargains

    Santa was no match for tech-savvy shoppers during the holiday season. 

    When it came to finding the best products and the best prices, more than half of consumers came armed with their cell phones to help them make purchasing decisions. And just as traditional brick-and-mortar retailers feared, many of those shoppers decided not to buy merchandise from stores they visited thanks to information they got via mobile phone comparison shopping. 

    Those findings come from a study released Monday by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, which found: 

    • 38 percent of cell owners used their phone to call a friend while they were in a store for advice about a purchase they were considering making.
    • 24 percent of cell owners used their phone to look up reviews of a product online while they were in a store.
    • 25 percent of adult cell owners used their phones to look up the price of a product online while they were in a store, to see if they could get a better price somewhere else. 

    “Consumers are feeling like they have a leg up on retailers,” said Esther Swilley, assistant professor of marketing at Kansas State University, about the increasing use of mobile devices to bargain hunt. “They can get price quotes quickly, and they now realize, ‘I can do better than what you’ve got here.’ ” 

    Not surprisingly, the under-50 crowd was more likely to use mobile devices for online product reviews, and urban and suburban cell phone owners were about twice as likely as rural users to have recently used their phones for product analysis. 

    Minority mobile users were more apt to look up online reviews than white cell phone owners; and college-educated shoppers were more likely to dial for deals than those who did not attend college. 

    Retailers who are worried about consumers’ new-found independence, she added, are going to have a hard time curbing these cell-phone price crusaders. 

    Target recently moved to try and derail mobile deal seekers by asking some manufacturers to create Target-exclusive items that would make it harder to comparison shop. The retailer, along with many other merchants who rely heavily on in-store sales, don’t much like the growing habit of “showrooming,” an industry term for shoppers who use stores as a place to check out items and then buy products online at lower prices. 

    Such fears, it turns out, are warranted, according to the Pew study. 

    Researched asked respondents what actions they took after using their phones in stores to look up prices, and 37 percent said they decided not to buy the product at all. 

    In addition: 

    • 35 percent purchased the product at that store. 
    • 19 percent purchased the product online. 
    • 8 percent bought the product at another store. 

    That’s just the beginning, said Eric Johnson, management professor and information technology expert at Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth University, who expects mobile devices will become a shopping mainstay. 

    Retailers such as Target and Best Buy, he said, have been the most worried about how the technology will undermine sales because of the “petting-zoo phenomenon,” but they’ll have to learn to embrace it given the potential upside. 

    Savvy merchants are using mobile technologies to “augment the shopping experience,” he explained, pointing to Wet Seal, the junior apparel chain, as a prime example. 

    Wet Seal offers its customers an app that gives them suggestions for ensemble pieces, or accessories, when they scan codes on merchandise in the store. They can buy the products in the store, or go to a virtual shelf online and purchase the color or size they want if it’s not in stock, he said. Mobile users can upload the outfits to Facebook so friends can offer their “likes” or “dislikes” before shoppers buy. 

    This type of mobile integration, he said, “is where the real excitement is.” 

    Traditional retailers, he continued, “can’t just employ defensive moves to make it difficult to compare, but they have to find substantial ways to connect with the shopper in the shopping experience, and do that with mobile apps.”

    Related story:

    Target tries to fight off online retailers 

     

  • Women are better at parking than men, study says

    A study from the United Kingdom suggests women may take longer to park, but they do a better job. NBC's Brian Williams reports.

    By msnbc.com staff and wire

    After years of enduring sexist jokes and taunts from their male counterparts, women drivers can finally take heart -- a new study suggests they’re actually better at parking than men.

    Covert surveillance of car parks across the United Kingdom shows that, while women may take longer to park, they are more adept than men at maneuvering into a parking space, and when they park they are more likely to leave their vehicles in the middle of a parking bay.

    The month-long study, conducted by the U.K.’s National Car Parks, was carried out amongst 2,500 drivers and looked at various aspects of parking -- including technique, accuracy and time taken to park -- in order to produce a “parking coefficient” -- an overall score of how well a driver parks.

    The overall score for women drivers was higher than for male drivers. Women also fared better when it came to finding empty spaces, were more accurate in lining themselves up before starting a parking maneuver, and were more likely to use a driving instructor’s favored method of reversing into a parking spot.

    “Women fared better in many areas of the scoring,” the report said. “This is despite the fact that, when questioned about their beliefs, only one fifth (18%) thought they were better parkers than men and less than a third (28%) of women believed they were better parkers than their partners.”

    What do you think? Are women better at parking? Share your thoughts on Facebook.

    Related:

    Insurance study: Women are better drivers than men 

     

  • Union membership rates are no longer falling

    CEPR

    The downhill slide in U.S. union membership has stalled. 

    After steep declines since 2008, the unionization rate leveled off last year, pointing to what is either a number that just can’t go any lower, a lull in yet more union membership hemorrhaging, or the beginning of a labor turnaround. 

    Union membership plummeted by nearly 1.4 million workers between 2008 and 2010, but “hit a plateau in 2011,” according to the Center for Economic Policy Research, an economic think tank that reviewed data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

    The private sector led the way with a union membership increase of 110,000 employees, while the public sector saw a 61,000 decline, mainly due to government cutbacks. 

    The data shows a stabilization following years of unionization declines, but could it be the early signs of a union renaissance? 

    “No, not yet,” surmised John Budd, a professor of work and organizations at the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Management and director of the Center for Human Resources and Labor Studies. 

    “We’ve reached a core group that doesn’t have much left to shrink,” he said, about traditional unionized workers in industries such as auto, airlines, and healthcare. On the other hand, he added, it could be a sign “people are turning to unionization again.” 

    The growing perception among many that economic inequities are rampant could fuel a rethinking of the role unions can play, he maintained. “That’s something that unions fight for, equality and economic fairness,” he said. “In terms of workers getting frustrated and unions turning the corner as a result, the signs of that potential have been around for a number of years now.” 

    A positive sign, he noted, is that in a political environment that has vilified organized labor and has spawned movements to hamper organizing rights in states such as Minnesota and Wisconsin, membership numbers have stabilized. 

    Others aren’t as hopeful. 

    Gary Chaison, professor of Industrial Relations at Clark University’s Graduate School of Management, believes the worst is yet to come. “There will be greater layoffs in the public sector as cities and states have to lay off workers to narrow the budget shortfalls caused by excessive pension obligations,” he said. “And as the economy stalls, perhaps the result of continuing high employment and low consumer confidence, or the banking crisis in Europe, employers in manufacturing will be reluctant to add to their workforces.” 

    Here are some details of the CEPR report: 

    • The largest net increases in unionization came from health care and social assistance; construction; and durable goods manufacturing. 
    • The biggest declines came from professional and business services; utilities; and non-durable manufactured goods. 
    • Florida saw the biggest gains in union members in 2011; followed by Michigan Colorado, Illinois and Missouri. 
    • New York, the most heavily unionized state, saw the sharpest drop, followed by California.

    Overall, women represented the biggest increase in union membership with an increase of 36,000 female members, compared to about 12,000 men. 

    “I don't think that men or woman have a greater natural propensity to join unions, but it's all about industry,” Chaison said. “Apparently there have been fewer job losses or health care occupations or service occupations -- hotels and restaurants -- dominated by women.”

     

  • Buzz: Cord-eating bunnies and other late-to-work tales

    Tony Dejak / AP

    Is this dog thinking of crazy ways to make you late for work?

    We here at Life Inc. are always learning new things about our readers.

    This week, we learned that you all have given your bosses quite a few interesting and hilarious reasons for arriving late at work. Some of them are actually true!

    A post on the oddest excuses HR people had heard for why their employees were late prompted a number of you to share your own stories of workplace tardiness.

    One of our favorite posts came from a reader who is so concerned with being punctual that the reader's clock is always set 15 minutes fast. But on one particularly calamitous day, a combination of bad weather and bad traffic left the reader with just two minutes to spare:

    “’Just made it,’ I thought as I closed the car door and tried to step away. I say tried to step away, because I'd caught my pant leg in the car door. Worse, I could see my keys on the dash. I could neither free my pant leg nor open the door.”

    Luckily, the reader’s boss saw the whole thing, and everyone had a good laugh.

    The original post recounted an HR person who said an employee was late because the cat had the hiccups.

    Based on what our readers had to say on our blog and our Facebook page, pets are often conspiring to make you late.

    Cats get stuck in trees, vomit on the floor and position themselves in just the right place to trigger the garage door sensor over and over.

    Dogs jump in your car and lock the door with their paws, trash your trash bags and have late-night fights with other animals that leave both animal and human in need of medical care.

    One reader even recounted how her bunny ate through the alarm clock cord, burning its mouth in the process and making her husband late for work.

    Of course, you can get in all sorts of trouble in the morning without any pet intervention whatsoever.

    Over on our msnbc Facebook page, one reader literally got stuck. In the bathroom.

    “The door wouldn’t let me out of the bathroom and I had to break it in half, true story,” the reader posted.

    Should we all have emergency axes under our sinks?

    Another one of our favorites:

    “Sorry I’m late, boss. The media was ignoring Ron Paul again.”

    Your stories were completely engrossing and often laugh-out-loud funny. That’s something we could all use a little bit more of these days, when most stories about the job market are more serious.

    Another reader on our Today Money Facebook page summed it up well:

    “Thanks, you guys, you just helped me be late for work with these excuses!”

     

  • Too little, too late? Factory jobs making comeback

    John Schoen, msnbc.com

    Manufacturing accounts for 9 percent of the U.S. workforce, compared with 28 percent in 1960 and 12 percent just a decade ago.

    President Barack Obama is on the road this week touting a plan to bring jobs back to the United States, in part by bolstering manufacturing here.

    It’s no secret that’s a tough challenge.

    The United States has lately seen an increase in manufacturing jobs, something Obama noted in his State of the Union address Tuesday. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 330,000 manufacturing jobs have been created over the past two years, bringing the total to nearly 11.8 million as of December.

    Still, that is a nearly 2 million short of the 13.7 million manufacturing jobs that existed when the economy went into recession in December 2007. And it’s far fewer than in the late 1970s, when more than 19 million Americans -- out of a much smaller work force -- were employed in manufacturing, which was seen as a key path to a middle-class life.

    Manufacturing may be bouncing back, but it is returning in a far different form. The recession washed out many inefficent companies, leaving behind operations that even leaner and more highly automated. That means they can make do with fewer workers even as they increase production.

    As a recent series of stories in The New York Times has highlighted, successful companies like Apple have prospered largely by mastering a global supply chain that depends on sending work overseas to take advantage of low-cost labor.

    Obama is hoping that tax breaks and other incentives will help encourage manufacturers to keep jobs here, or even bring some back. Time will tell whether that is true.

    Related:

    Why companies aren’t hiring more workers

    Yes, we do still make things in America

    Apple accused of ignoring labor abuses

  • Taco Bell jumps into the breakfast market

    AP

    This product image provided by Taco Bell Corp., shows Taco Bell's new Johnsonville sausage and egg wrap, one of the items the fast-food chain will be offering on its new breakfast menu which debuts Thursday, Jan. 26, 2012.

    It's getting a little crowded in the breakfast nook.

    Fast food chain Taco Bell announced Thursday that it's entering the breakfast fray. It joins larger rivals such as McDonald's, Wendy's and Subway in a market saturated with breakfast options including specialty coffees to lure in addicts who’ll buy a breakfast sandwich along with that daily cup of joe.

    Irvine, Calif.-based Taco Bell, which is known for its low price points and late night hours, is introducing a breakfast menu at nearly 800 restaurants across 10 Western states, including California and Arizona.

    “This is a very important launch for our brand,” said Brian Niccol, Taco Bell’s chief marketing and innovation officer, in a statement. “While we're beginning in the West, where people grew up with breakfast burritos, we plan to reach a national audience in the future, becoming a part of their morning routine, and truly opening people's minds and taste buds as they begin to open their eyes and take on the day."

    Notably, Taco Bell’s breakfast offerings include well-known brands like Tropicana, Cinnabon, and Seattle’s Best Coffee, which may serve to alleviate customer concerns about food quality following a 2011 lawsuit in which the contents of Taco Bell’s beef were called into question. 

    “It helps with one of the issues that they need to content with, which is quality,” said David Morris, an analyst for consumer goods research firm Packaged Facts. “That’s a smart move.” 

    The chain plans to open its drive-through locations an hour earlier than normal for breakfast, generally around 8 a.m. or 9 a.m., and will offer breakfast until 11 a.m. It aims to roll out its breakfast menu on the East Coast in 2013, and will begin experimenting with offering breakfast foods during late-night hours in late 2012.

    Fast food breakfast has turned into one of the swiftest growing areas in the entire restaurant industry, and Taco Bell competitors like McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Subway have already successfully rolled out breakfast menus. A 2010 report from NPD Group found that breakfast accounted for 60 percent of the restaurant industry’s growth over the last five years, with breakfast traffic increasing by an average of 2 percent per year. Lunch traffic, was largely flat, while dinner traffic decreased by an average of 2 percent per year during the same five-year period. 

    Despite the already-crowded market for breakfast, Taco Bell’s low price points and its Mexican food-tinged variation on the traditional breakfast offering should serve it well in the battle over breakfast, experts say.

    “Taco Bell has done a great job at being an industry leader in that category,” said Darren Tristano, executive vice president of Technomic, a food and beverage industry research firm. “If you have a good coffee offering like many of the successful chains have, you can then provide a differentiated product because of the Mexican food offering.”

    He added, “Younger Americans, specifically millenials, are looking for not only spiciness at breakfast, but also the cheaper price point.”

    Taco Bell has some catching up to do, however. McDonald’s is already raking in a hefty 27 percent of its $33 billion in annual sales at breakfast, according to Tristano.

    It could serve as a slightly cheaper alternative to some of its competitors. Among Taco Bell’s new breakfast offerings are sausage or bacon and egg burritos for $1.49, grand skillet burritos for $2.79, and $3.99 combo meals containing a breakfast item with a drink and hash browns. That’s slightly less than breakfast combo meals elsewhere, which tend to approach $5 and up.

    Another plus for Taco Bell that stands to help it capture part of the breakfast market is its already-established drive-thru presence, as well as its decision to sell Seattle's Best Coffee, which Packaged Facts’ Morris says is one of the major reasons for the growth of sales in the breakfast category. “The magic of coffee is that it’s been one of the few products that people have been willing to pay more for both before the recession and after,” he said.

    Taco Bell later opening hours versus competitors could be a problem, though. “A coffee drinker is going to go elsewhere if they [Taco Bell] don’t open early enough,” Morris said. “They’ll need to contend with that in order to compete with more established limited-service breakfast players.”

  • Sorry I'm late, boss, my cat had the hiccups

    Bebeto Matthews / AP

    Yep, I'm about to make you late for work

    The most common excuse for being late to work is also the most predictable one: Traffic.

    The least common excuses for being late to work? Now, those are much more interesting.

    CareerBuilder.com recently asked Harris Interactive to survey employees and employers on workplace tardiness.

    While employees said traffic, lack of sleep and bad weather were the chief causes of being late to work, hiring managers shared some more unusual excuses they’d heard for not showing up on time.

    Among them:

    *Employee's cat had the hiccups

    *Employee’s angry roommate cut the cord to his phone charger, so it didn’t charge and his alarm didn’t go off.

    *Employee’s leg was trapped between the subway car and the platform (turned out to be true).

    *Employee thought she had won the lottery (she didn’t).

    And our favorite:

    *Employee got distracted watching the TODAY Show.

    Now that’s totally understandable.

    Apparently, getting to work on time is still a problem, even in this economy. The survey found that 16 percent of workers are late to work at least once a week, a tiny increase from last year.

    It’s also not always a laughing matter: About one-third of hiring managers said they had fired an employee for being late.

    Readers, tell us your most unusual reason for being late to work in the comments section below or on our Facebook page. We’ll feature some of the responses in an upcoming post.

    Related:

    Help wanted: Must be able to show up to work on time

     

  • Cheapism: Shredding on the best budget snowboards

    The K2 Vandal youth board is also a cheap option for small adults.

    By Kara Reinhardt, Cheapism.com

    Recent snow in many regions of the country has resorts rejoicing and snowboarders raring to hit the slopes and terrain parks. There’s still time for beginners to take advantage of deals on lessons as part of Learn to Ski and Snowboard Month. Many offers include lift tickets and rental equipment. If you’re ready for your own gear, you can find an entry-level snowboard for less than $300 from a brand such as Forum, K2, Ride, Salomon, or even Burton. That’s not to mention the bargains available on snowboards from previous seasons.

    Most budget boards are designed for entry-level to intermediate snowboarders, with features that make them more forgiving. They tend to have a softer flex, which means they bend and twist more easily than stiffer boards built for high speeds. That gives even younger, smaller snowboarders more control and helps park riders initiate jumps. Manufacturers often give their boards a flex rating on a 1-to-5 or 1-to-10 scale, with 1 being the softest.

    Low-cost boards are typically the same shape at both ends, which makes it easy for snowboarders to ride regular (with the left foot in front) or switch (with the right foot in front). These so-called “twin-tip” boards come in two different varieties. Riders who already know their preferred stance can opt for a directional twin, which is stiffer at the tail or back end of the board, allowing for more controlled turns. A true twin has uniform flex throughout.

    Traditionally snowboards have had a bit of an arch in the center, known as camber, that’s forced flat against the ground by the rider’s body weight, resulting in springy, responsive performance. These days, inexpensive boards commonly feature reverse camber, or rocker, where the center of the board curves toward the ground and the ends lift off the snow. This helps keep beginners from catching an edge, making rocker an appealing choice for any rider who prefers smooth landings to face plants. One drawback is the board doesn’t grip the snow as well when you’re speeding downhill trying to make aggressive turns. A snowboard with flat or zero camber has a flat base that sits flush against the snow and combines attributes of both traditional and reverse camber.

    Finally, inexpensive snowboards feature extruded bases, which are generally slower but easier to maintain and repair than the sintered bases on pricier boards.

    Below are Cheapism’s top picks for affordable snowboards.

    • The Salomon Pulse (starting at $249) is a directional twin board that earns kudos for its versatility. The flat camber provides more stability than rocker but still helps new riders avoid catching an edge. (Where to buy)
    • The K2 Vandal youth board (starting at $200) comes in sizes big enough to suit some small adults as well. Experts recommend this true twin board with rocker for riders itching to learn some tricks in the terrain park. (Where to buy)
    • The Forum Recon (starting at $300) transitions easily from the park to powder to groomed runs, according to experts. This is a directional twin board with rocker and a soft to medium flex. (Where to buy)
    • The Ride Lowride (starting at $170) is a smaller junior board that experts favor for learning. It has the softest flex in the line and a true twin shape with rocker. Ride also offers the nearly identical Blush, with more feminine graphics, for girls. (Where to buy)

    More from Cheapism:
    Cheap snowboards
    Cheap women's snowboards
    Best hiking backpacks
    Kids winter activities

  • Cluttered cubicle may make you more organized

    Anthony D'Ambrosio

    A messy desks may lead to clearer, more organized thinking, a new study shows

    Attention bosses who harass employees to clean up their cluttered cubicles: As it turns out, messy desks may lead to clearer, more organized thinking, a new study shows.

    And this effect may not just be limited to the worker with the messy desk. The study results suggest that the mess-effect may impact all those sitting near the clutter, says Jia Liu, a researcher at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands.

    Conventional wisdom is that a messy desk leads to a messy mind, Liu says. But sometimes the mess sparks a desire for simplicity, making people to think in a more organized fashion, she adds.

    Liu and her colleagues ran a series of experiments to determine how people react to clutter, according to the report published in the Journal of Consumer Research.

    In one experiment, 49 college students were asked to sit at a cluttered cubicle, a tidy cubicle, or one that was in-between. 

    After sitting at the desk, the volunteers were asked to rate on a scale of one to nine how well a series of statements fit them: “It upsets me to go into complicated situations,” “I would like to simplify my life as much as I can,” “I would like to keep things simple,” and “I am bothered by complicated things.”

    Next the volunteers were given a test in which they needed to sort 33 products into groups – the volunteers had to come up with an organizing principle themselves.

    When the results were in, it was clear that people sitting at messy desks came up with much simpler organizing principles. They were also the ones who scored high on questions like, “I would like to simplify my life as much as I can.” 

    Liu and her colleagues concluded: “Opposite to conventional wisdom, we found that participants working at a messy desk displayed simpler cognitions. This is because messiness induces a need for simplicity.”

    The study suggests that someone else’s mess might do just as well to spark a need for simplicity. “Other people’s messy desks may indeed help us to organize things simply, as in our experiment the mess was not generated by the participants,” Liu says. “They were placed in a messy environment.”

    Does that mean bosses should maybe encourage employees to be messy?

    Not so fast, Liu says.

    “We’d be careful with making recommendations,” she explained. “One reason is that simplification is not always desirable. In addition, we suspect that extreme mess certainly impairs efficiency.” 

     

  • Financial infidelity: Take our survey on money secrets and lies

    Getty Images stock

    Are you hiding a money secret?

    Maybe you snuck a latte in this morning even though you and your spouse swore off the coffee shop to save money.

    Maybe you told your boyfriend those shoes you bought were on sale, when really you paid full price.

    Or maybe you’re waiting for just the right moment to reveal to your fiancé that you have a $12,000 credit card bill hanging over your head.

    Everyone knows financial issues can make or break a relationship, and yet we’re guessing few of us are completely honest with our spouse or partner when it comes to money.

    TODAY.com and SELF magazine are partnering to find out the truth about money lies.

    We want to hear from you: How much financial information do you have to share with your partner, and when? What is an acceptable little white lie, and when does not being upfront about finances constitute financial infidelity?

    Click here to take our survey, and we’ll use the results in some upcoming stories.

     

  • It's guys, not ladies, who splurge on lunch

    Getty Images / Getty Images file

    A man eats his lunch at a Burger King in London.

    The next time you stop in for a morning latte or head out for a restaurant lunch, take a look around – and don’t be surprised if you see a lot of young men standing in line.

    A new survey of workers finds that men spend significantly more on coffee and lunch than women.

    The survey, from staffing firm Accounting Principals, also found that younger workers spend more than older workers on lunch and coffee during the workday.

    Overall, those lunches out and coffee breaks are costing workers a bundle.  American workers who buy coffee and lunch spend an average of $1,000 a year on coffee and $2,000 a year on lunch, based on the survey of 1,000 workers.

    About two-thirds of workers buy lunch and half buy coffee during the week.

    Men were slightly more likely than women to go out to eat, but they spent a lot more. The men who buy their lunches spend an average of $46.30 on lunch each week, compared with $26.50 for women who go out to eat.

    Men who buy coffee spend an average of $25.70 vs. $15 for women.

    The caffeine fix is a bigger hit on the wallets of 18- to 34-year-old workers. Younger workers who buy coffee spend an average of $24.74 a week on coffee, compared with $14.15 for workers 45 and older who buy coffee during the work week. Younger workers also spend far more on lunch than older workers: about $45 a week vs. $32.

    Not surprisingly, a third of those surveyed said one of their goals for 2012 was to bring their own lunch more often.

    Accounting Principals, a unit of Adecco, commissioned the survey in December.

    Tip of the hat to Consumerist, which first reported on the study.

    Related:

    Frugal food: Brown bag options that won't break the bank

    Starbucks raising prices in Northeast, Sunbelt

     

  • Buzz: Losing your lunch (hour) and trouble finding workers

    Yes, the job market is slowly improving. But employment, or lack thereof, continues to be among the hottest topics for politicians, economists, businesses -- and Life Inc. readers.

    Our most popular post this week was actually posted late last week. But the topic -- that many employers say they can’t find good workers despite the high unemployment rate -- kept readers talking for days.

    More than 30,000 people took our poll on whether it’s hard to find good workers, even in this economy, and the results may surprise some people.

    Nearly four in 10 readers said they or their employers were having trouble finding good candidates, while about two in 10 said there were plenty of qualified people out there. The rest either worked at places that weren’t hiring or were unemployed.

    Many readers complained that employers these days seem to have unrealistic expectations about people’s qualifications.

    “Firms continue to create positions out of touch with reality, say, an accountant who can juggle and has hair-styling experience,” one reader lamented.

    Others complained that employers assume they can offer less money or other perks because people are so desperate for work.

    “The problem is they are unwilling to spend the money on training or pay a decent wage,” another reader wrote.

    It’s no secret that those of us who are lucky enough to have a job are likely working harder than ever, as employers seek to squeeze more productivity out of everyone they hand a paycheck to.

    For many, that means working through lunch. Many readers could relate to a post this week on the fact that the good old lunch hour is becoming an endangered species.

    “Endangered? I know NO ONE who takes lunch hours!” one reader who tweeted the post howled.

    About 65 percent of readers who took our poll on the topic said everyone at their office eats at their desk.

    Some who said they do take a lunch break at least had the good sense to realize everyone else is probably jealous.

    “I work for a European company -- long lunch hour, 36 days of vacation, good health care, supportive management -- sorry USA,” one reader wrote.

  • Lose a job, prepare for a really long job search

    Bureau of Labor Statistics

    The median amount of time it's taking for unemployed people to find new jobs is about 21 weeks.

    Here’s the good news: Employers are hiring more workers than they are firing these days, a welcome turnaround from the darkest days of the Great Recession.

    Here’s the bad news: If you are among those unlucky enough to lose your job now, you'd better prepare for a long job search.

    The median duration of unemployment was 21 weeks or about five months as of December. That means half of all unemployed workers had been without a job for more than five months.

    That’s actually an improvement from mid-2010, when the median duration of unemployment peaked at 25 weeks. But it’s still nearly three times what it was before the recession began and much higher than in previous tough job markets.

    The main problem: There just aren’t enough jobs to go around.

    Last year the economy added an average of about 137,000 jobs a month. While that’s better than when the economy was shedding jobs, it wasn’t nearly enough to absorb the millions of unemployed and new workers entering the market, said Sylvia Allegretto, an economist with the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at the University of California, Berkeley.

    “That rate of job growth is simply not fast enough to really soak up all those who are unemployed and underemployed, and those who have left the labor market and will be coming back to the labor market,” Allegretto said.

     

    Allegretto doesn’t expect the situation to improve much soon for the long-term unemployed.

    That’s partly because there are still 13 million people who are unemployed and seeking work. It’s also because there are many other Americans out there who may have stopped looking for a job because the market was so bad, and will start looking again if the market improves.

    Those excruciatingly long job searches are an especially big problem for older workers. The median duration of unemployment for 20- to 24-year-olds was 16.3 weeks in December, compared with 31.4 weeks for 55- to 64-year-olds.

    Related:

    Many Americans still not prepared for a job loss     
    Five years without work: Labor department will now track it

  • Many Americans still not prepared for a job loss

    Mark Lennihan / AP

    People wait to talk with potential employers at a job fair in New York last December.

    The sudden loss of a job has become, if not commonplace over the last years, at least not very surprising.

    And yet, many Americans remain unprepared for not having an income. A new survey from Country Financial finds that one-third of Americans would immediately fall behind on their bills if they lost a job and were left with no income.

    That’s virtually the same result that Country Financial got the last time they asked the same question, in July of 2009.

    The good news: About one-quarter of Americans are well-prepared for a job loss. The January survey found that 24 percent of respondents could weather five months without an income. That’s also virtually the same percentage as in July of 2009.

    Country Financial conducts the survey of 3,000 people bi-monthly.

    Although the economy is consistently adding more jobs than it is shedding, some workers continue to be let go. For example, Kraft Foods said this week that it would cut 1,600 jobs as it prepares to split its business in two.

    If you do lose a job, the market remains tough. The median time it takes to find a new job is 21 weeks, or about five months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    There are currently about 13 million unemployed Americans who are looking for work, and the unemployment rate is at 8.5 percent.

    Related:

    Role reversal: Employers say they can't find workers

    Few part-timers but more working multiple jobs

  • Epperson: Start saving for your child’s education NOW

    Today Money financial expert Sharon Epperson joined us for a live Web chat Wednesday to answer your questions.

    Here’s one of her answers to questions from the live chat. (See below for the full Q&A and video of Sharon’s TV appearance this morning.)

    Amey asked:

    “I just had a baby (4 months). I want to start saving money for him but not exactly sure of the best place to save. I was thinking about the 529 savings plan but I wasn't sure if it HAD to be used for college. Of course I'd like him to go to college, but what if he doesn't. What happens to that money?”

    Sharon replied:

    “You are so smart to start saving for his education NOW. 529 college savings plans are great ways to force you to save for college - but you must use those funds for qualified higher education expenses or pay a penalty fee when you withdraw the money. It's like a 401k or IRA in the sense that you can take the money out without penalty if it's used for its intended purpose - otherwise you pay a penalty. The good news is that even if your child does not go to college, the money can go to another beneficiary -- you, another child, family member, friend, anyone. If you're not sure if your child will go to college, hedge your bets. Put some money in the 529 plan and some in a Roth IRA. You can use the Roth IRA for your own retirement or use the contributions you've made to the Roth college if needed. Actually, Roth contributions can be taken out at any time TAX-FREE, making them another great way to save.”

    Here’s the full chat archive and Sharon’s TV appearance:

    If you have a question for our TODAY Money experts, submit it here

    To sign up for an e-mail reminder for our next chat, click here.

  • Cheapism: Best diet plans for under $20

    Getty Images

    Making your own food choices requires discipline, but can save you some money.

    By Kara Reinhardt, Cheapism.com

    New years and resolutions to lose weight go together like ice cream and cake — er, rather salad and low-fat dressing. Not surprisingly, there are deals galore on diet plans right now. But there’s no use taking advantage of a waived sign-up fee if you ultimately can’t afford the plan itself. After all, what good is a weight-loss plan if the stress on your budget leads to emotional eating? Luckily several diet plans responsible for numerous success stories start at less than $20 per month.

    Generally the low-cost options are book-based or support-only plans, as opposed to food-delivery programs like Nutrisystem and Jenny Craig, which send subscribers carefully calibrated meals. Making your own food choices requires more discipline, even with the help of recipes, meal plans, online tools, and support from fellow dieters. If you can handle it, however, you can save money and develop healthful habits — including an ongoing exercise routine — that will help keep your weight down even after you go off a formal plan.

    Want to lose weight? Join the 25,000-pound challenge

    According to an expert at Mayo Clinic, the prevailing weight-loss guideline of one to two pounds per week offers the greatest likelihood of long-term success. At that rate it may take a while to get to a point where you could hold up an old pair of pants on TV, but a slow, steady approach has proved safe and effective. Whichever weight-loss plan you choose, be sure to consult your doctor before you begin.

    Below are Cheapism’s top picks for affordable diet plans.

    • Weight Watchers (online membership starting at $18.95 for 28 days) combines dietary requirements with physical activity and online or in-person support. Subscribers track what they eat using a points system that favors high-fiber, low-fat foods. Weight Watchers caps the number of points allowed each day and increases the allotment if you exercise. The program boasts multitudes of satisfied customers. (Where to buy)
    • eDiets (online membership starting at $18.95 for 28 days) offers a food-delivery service as well as a support-only option. Customers register numerous complaints about the food, from preparation to packaging and delivery. The more cost-efficient online diet plans, on the other hand, claim many admirers. The personalized plans include 24/7 online support, and members credit the program with instilling resistance to impulse buying and binge eating. (Where to buy)
    • The South Beach Diet (online membership starting at $4 per week; books starting at $7.99) places strict limits on your carb intake at the beginning, then slowly re-introduces whole grains, fruits, and starchy vegetables. The membership includes meal plans, peer support, and online tools for tracking your progress. The latest version incorporates exercise. Adherents report that the diet yields speedy results and is easy to maintain. (Where to buy)

    More from Cheapism:
    Cheap diet plans
    Cheap elliptical trainers
    Cheap NYC restaurants
    Cheap blenders

  • Wheels to keep both parents and kids humming

    Parenting magazine's Shawn Bean shows TODAY's Ann Curry three cars that are smart buys if you're looking for a family vehicle, equipped with sliding second-row seats, extra storage space and multimedia centers.

    Chauffeuring kids around amid all the other responsibilities that parents face can be exhausting duty. To ease nerves and boost sales, automakers are offering vehicle-shopping parents an array of conveniences. Sifting through the latest models, Parenting magazine has come up with seven to suit just about everyone's taste — even those underage back-seat drivers.

    Two of the seven featured in the magazine are:

    Courtesy of GM Company

    The Chevrolet Traverse can easily carry half your kid's soccer team.

    Chevrolet Traverse
    By the numbers: Three rows, up to eight seats, 17 mpg city/24 mpg highway

    Carpool 2.0: Sliding second-row seats that children as young as 7 can operate. Play tunes on your smartphone through the sound system using wireless Bluetooth.

    Mommy, I can do it: The seat belts are easy for kids to snap themselves into.

    No sticky seats: The cup holders can accommodate juice boxes and sippy cups.

    Price: From $29,510; chevrolet.com

    Courtesy of Toyota Motor Corp.

    The Prius V has plenty of room in the back — just don't forget the kids.

    Toyota Prius V
    By the numbers: Five seats, 67 cubic feet of storage with the rear seatbacks down (that's approximately 98 paper grocery bags), 44 mpg city/40 mpg highway

    Appy family: The dashboard doubles as a tablet. Toyota's Entune multimedia system lets you use the in-dash touchscreen to tune in to The Muppets station on Pandora, search Bing for the nearest Pinkberry, or get live traffic reports.

    Price: From $26,400; toyota.com

    Of course, now you just have to find that middle ground between the wheels you want and the one the kids want.

    More from Parenting.com:

    10 best cities for families 
    Common car seat mistakes you may be making   
    17 convertible car seats with extended rear facing

  • America's lunch hour on the endangered list

    BloomImage RF via Getty Images

    Multitasking eats the lunch hour. More people than ever in America are skipping lunch hours and eating at their desks instead.

    Employees in Hong Kong’s financial district staged a protest last week because their lunch break of 90 minutes was going to be shortened to only an hour.

    Here in the United States, lunch hour is unheard of for many U.S. workers, yet nobody is marching in the streets over it.

    Americans don’t seem to have enough time for an actual lunch break. Only 35 percent of employees in this country say they almost always take a lunch break, according to a web survey in 2011 of about 750 respondents by Right Management, an HR consulting firm. Another poll by the company taken in 2010 that surveyed 2,300 found nearly 50 percent of U.S. workers consistently took time off for a midday meal.

    “Lunch patterns allow us to infer a few things about the North American workplace; and one thing that we already know is that the pressure for productivity and performance can be relentless,” said Michael Haid, senior vice president of talent management at Right Management. “This pressure is showing up in various ways like our finding that one-in-three employees are very likely now in the habit of taking lunch at their computers and phones and with supervisors and colleagues.”

    About 65 percent of employees either eat at their desk or don’t take lunch breaks at all, according to the company’s recent survey.

    It’s not just rank and file workers. A study by CareerBuilder found that about 40 percent of corporate executives brownbag their lunches, while only 19 percent eat out at a sit-down restaurant, and 17 percent get fast food.

    And it’s women executives who seem most lunch-away-from-the-office adverse. More than half, or 57 percent, of women polled said they brought their lunch from home, compared to 36 percent among their male manager counterparts.

    Sure, it looks good if you’re busting your butt to get work done, especially in this tough job market, but not taking time out for a healthy lunch could have far-reaching ramifications.

    The lunch hour was always seen as a time to get away from the office or factory floor, and that's what workplace experts say workers need to get the full benefits of a meal break. 

    It's critical for workers to leave the office for lunch, said career and executive coach Rebecca Weingarten, in order "to clear their heads and gain perspective on what they're working on. Also if you're stumped with a problem, thinking about something else actually helps the brain process and come up with a solution."

    And Doug Wright, head of clinical development for European insurance firm Aviva Health, which published a report on workers eating habits late last year, added: “It’s well documented that eating more healthily can improve general wellbeing and life expectancy, so there are countless benefits to adopting this approach in the workplace, It’s also important for people to take a break from their desks where possible as this can help improve both morale and efficiency for employees.”

    There are no federal laws mandating lunch breaks. “It’s actually something that’s regulated on a state-by-state basis,” said Marc Mandelman, an employment attorney for Proskauer in New York.

    Photoblog: Adios a la siesta? Spain's long lunches under threat

    In New York, he explained, “you have to provide at least a half an hour lunch break to employees in most situations. But depending on the industry, there may be different requirements.”

    There are 22 states with some sort of meal-break mandates on the books, according to Department of Labor data. See this chart to find out if your state is one of them.

    Most white-collar jobs, Mandelman continued, generally provide about an hour for meal breaks.

    Even so, that doesn’t mean workers are taking the time to munch in peace.

    “I wonder if the reluctance to take a break is an expression of devotion or a negative consequence of the unrelenting pressure some organizations are exerting on their workforces to get more done with fewer resources,” said Haid. “Taking time away from one’s desk for lunch would help reduce tension and boost energy. But our research results might lead us to ask is that still a real option for people now?”

  • Defense cutbacks worry some military families

    Jim Seida / msnbc.com

    Hermes Corcuera, seen here with his wife Amber, in Gig Harbor, Wash., spent six months in Iraq and a year in Korea during his five years of military service. Now he's looking for a new career.

    Hermes Corcuera joined the military because he wanted to give back to a country that has given him so much.

    But now that he’s done his duty, the 25-year-old Cuban immigrant is finding himself in a position that could be familiar to many soldiers in the coming months and years: Out of the military, and out of a job.

    The move to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and potentially cut military spending significantly over the next 10 years is translating into pocketbook worries for many military families.


    "For a lot of individuals, it's going to be very difficult, especially if they have families," said Joe Sharpe, director of economics for The American Legion, one of the most prominent veterans services organizations.

    A new survey finds that middle-class military families are more likely to be setting stringent savings and spending goals this year, as the military gears up for some major cost-cutting of its own.

    The First Command Financial Behaviors Index, which tracks the finances of families with income of $50,000 or more, found that 49 percent of military families were planning to cut back on excessive spending in 2012, compared with 42 percent of nonmilitary families.

    In addition, 47 percent of military families said their goals for 2012 included getting out of debt, compared with 38 percent of nonmilitary families. The military families who responded to the monthly survey also were more likely to say they planned to do things like learn to budget responsibly and improve their credit scores.

    First Command also found that just one in four of the military families they surveyed think there are enough jobs out there for unemployed veterans.

    Corcuera, who immigrated to the United States as a young child, said he is glad to have been in the military.

    "It is a very rewarding job,” he said. “I get to serve my country.”

    After training as an interrogator and community liaison, Corcuera spent six months in Iraq and a year in Korea. A Specialist E4, he was most recently stationed at Fort Lewis in Washington state.

    He said he enjoyed the work.

    “It’s another way of saving lives,” he said.

    But as the military works to withdraw troops from the Gulf, he said there was not nearly as much need for interrogators and community liaisons. Although he was offered the option to re-enlist, he said the available jobs would have been a step down from his current position, and a foot injury left him ineligible for some of the available positions.

    He left the military on Jan. 4, after five years of service.

    He is applying for police department jobs, but he said it will likely be months before he hears back. He said many of his colleagues are looking at contract intelligence jobs, but he would rather be a police officer because he likes the idea of working with the community.

    “I want a stable career, and for a family that seems like the best option,” he said.

    Meanwhile, he said his initial claim for unemployment benefits was declined so he’s sorting out the paperwork for that.

    His wife Amber, 31, is hoping she can pick up more personal training work to keep the family afloat until Hermes lands a job. She said the couple, who have two children from Amber’s previous marriage, didn’t have much time to prepare financially for the change.

    They are especially nervous about keeping up on their bills because they know a ding in their credit score could affect Hermes’ job prospects.

    “We’ve done some things that save us a little bit of money, (but) all in all it’s just a matter of, ‘Hey, I guess we’re broke now,’” Amber said.

    The couple said they don’t think they could afford for Hermes to go to school, even with military aid, because they need income to support the family. Amber said they’re struggling to figure out what other options and support systems are out there for veterans.

    “As long as you’re in the military, it’s a great career to have. But because it’s a lifestyle rather than just a job, when you’re out, you’re out,” Amber said. “There aren’t a lot of avenues, realistically, for a military person to take.”

    Such worries are legitimate, said Sharpe of the American Legion.

    Sharpe noted that the unemployment rate for veterans of the most recent Gulf war efforts is already quite high at 13.1 percent. The comparable, non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for the general population is 8.3 percent.

    Sharpe expects joblessness among veterans to become an even bigger problem now that the military has withdrawn from Iraq and is working to reduce its presence in Afghanistan.

    Meanwhile, the military is being asked to reduce defense spending by $487 billion over 10 years as part of the government’s effort to keep the deficit in check. The tight federal budgets also may mean that there are fewer government jobs available to veterans, Sharpe said.

    Sharpe also said military personnel don’t necessarily have the certifications or other training they need to do private sector jobs that are similar to their military training. And although the nation's employment picture is improving, the competition for jobs is fierce.

    “It’s going to be extremely difficult,” Sharpe said.

    Sharpe is also a reservist at Fort Bragg, N.C., and he said many of the troops he serves with are worried about potential cutbacks. Some are putting off big expenses like a new car and others are planning to use their tax refunds to pay down debt. He said some are even stocking up on items they can get more cheaply at the commissary in preparation for leaving the military.

    “There seems to be a wave of panic going through the military community there at Fort Bragg,” he said.

    Related:

    We are the median: Living on $50,000, military-style

    They served, and now they search for work 

     

  • Job hunters still not careful on social media: study

    Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

    What from the "Don't be stupid on social media" school of philosophy do you not understand yet? In case there's any doubt about what you should or shouldn't be saying or doing on sites like Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, business psychologists from the U.K. are happy to let you know that those sites are being scoured for dirt or anything else that could trip you up with an employer, potential or existing.

    The psychologists, part of a group called OPP, presented its findings at a recent conference on occupational psychology. "When applying for a new job, candidates spend hours pulling together a targeted, convincing and professional-looking CV to secure that interview. But what if your potential employer is not noticing your impeccable spelling and beautifully formatted covering letter, but instead raising an eyebrow at your flippant comments, risqué photos and questionable ‘check-ins’ on Facebook?" OPP says.

    The organization surveyed 1,000 people in the U.K. and Ireland, and found:

    56 percent of respondents said that they were likely to check out the social media presence of potential employees (although 27 percent of those surveyed said they would be uncomfortable with the same being done to them). On the flipside, 37 percent of people said they change their persona online — so looking at their online presence may be misleading anyway.

    Think it's just Facebook or Twitter shenanigans that can get you off someone's list of potential hires? What if you say on LinkedIn that you're interested in "career opportunities" — LinkedIn offers you a check box for that if you want it — even though you're already working somewhere?

    OPP notes a real-life case about that in Britain. As reported in The Telegraph, John Flexman "is thought to be the first person in the country to bring a case for constructive dismissal after a dispute with bosses" over his LinkedIn profile:

    Mr Flexman is claiming hundreds of thousands of pounds from BG Group, a major gas exploration firm based in Reading, Berks, where he earned a £68,000 salary in charge of graduate recruitment.

    As well as loading his CV onto the site, Mr Flexman ticked a box to register an interest in “career opportunities."

    Says OPP: "For jobseekers, some pretty common-sense advice applies: Lock down your Facebook profile, and behave on LinkedIn as you would at a professional networking event (without the free bar!)"

    Related stories:

    Check out Technolog, Gadgetbox, Digital Life and In-Game on Facebook, and on Twitter, follow Suzanne Choney.

  • Let the tax season begin!

    Tina Fineberg / AP File

    Remember when we used to fill out tax forms by hand? For most people, tax time now means turning on the computer. The IRS announced Wednesday that you can begin e-filing your returns, marking the start of tax season.

    If you’re snowed in in Seattle or enjoying an extra long holiday weekend elsewhere in the country, here’s a nice way to spend the rest of the day: Filing your taxes.

    The Internal Revenue Service announced Tuesday that it has begun accepting electronically filed tax returns for the 2012 tax season.

    Most Americans already file individual tax returns electronically, and the government is hoping to increase that percentage even more in the coming years.

    Of course, many people will probably wait much longer to file their tax returns, expecially this year. That’s because the tax deadline has been extended to April 17.

     

  • How to ensure your home isn't under-insured

    Most homeowners have insurance. The question is: do you have enough insurance? Will your policy cover you if the worst happens – if your house is totally destroyed and you need to rebuild? 

    According to the Insurance Information Institute’s 2011 Insurance Pulse Survey, nearly half (48 percent) of all homeowners in the U.S. believe the insured value of their home is linked to its market value. 

    “They are two different things,” says Michael Barry, the institute’s vice president of media relations. “When it comes to buying homeowners insurance, you have to look at the insured value – what would it cost to rebuild my home in its current location with comparable construction materials if I were to have a total loss? And that number does not represent the market value.” 

    With home prices in the toilet, it’s easy to assume that you can save money by lowering the insurance coverage.  Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. The cost of building materials – copper, lumber, steel, concrete – have all gone up dramatically the last few years. 

    “It’s truly unfortunate that people don’t understand market value versus replacement cost,” says Rudy Werle, vice president of claims for the Grange Insurance Association, a regional insurance company based in Seattle.

    Werle recalls a recent claim for a house that burned to the ground and the homeowner was grossly under-insured. He had coverage for up to $350,000, but the estimated construction cost came in at $500,000. Werle says this customer was “one of the rare individuals who accepted responsibility” for the situation. 

    The insurance company did its best to help, but the new house did not have the quality of the original. The homeowner had to downgrade the kitchen appliances. Instead of granite countertops, he went with composite. He also had to settle for a lower-quality roof; one that was guaranteed for 30 years instead of 40. 

    Getting the right coverage is your job

    Experts say it’s smart to review your insurance coverage each year before the policy renews. But most people don’t do this. 

    Angie’s List recently polled its members and found that nearly one-third of those who responded hadn’t checked their home insurance policies for two years or more. 

    “This is your responsibility,” says Angie Hicks, the website’s founder. “Your insurance agent doesn’t know what you’ve done to your house. They don’t know if you added a deck or bought an expensive piece of jewelry. Only you know that information.” 

    So put this on your calendar to make sure you’re reviewing your policy at renewal time. 

    At the very least, you want to know what you have. Then you can tweak the policy or comparison shop. Make sure you don’t buy too much insurance. You don’t need to insure for the value of the land your house sits on. 

    According to the Insurance Information Institute, there are four elements that help you decide how much coverage to get:  

    - The cost to rebuild the structure.

    - The cost to replace the contents.

    - Additional living expenses if you have to move out during repairs.

    - Your liability to others who might get hurt on your property. 

    If you’re looking to save money raise the deductible, don’t cut back on coverage. The Insurance Information Institute says increasing the deductible from $500 to $1,000 could reduce premiums by up to 25 percent. 

    Remember: the amount of money the policy will pay for contents and additional living expenses is typically based on the coverage of the structure. 

    It’s important to have a home inventory to show the insurance company if there is a loss. The free app MyHOME Scr.APP.book (available for iPhones and Android phones) from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners lets you quickly photograph, grab bar codes and serial numbers and store them digitally.  There is also free software for your computer at knowyourstuff.org, a site run by the insurance industry. 

    Note: Expect higher rates for homeowners insurance this year. Bloomberg reports that Allstate, Travelers and State Farm, as well as other companies are raising rates. The price hikes are a result of poor return on investments and higher-than-expected storm losses in the U.S. last year. 

    More Information:

    Insurance Information Institute: Homeowners and renters insurance

    National Association of Insurance Commissioners: It pays to know your stuff 

     

  • Slightly more are thriving than struggling, analysis finds

    Gallup

     

    We may be living in difficult economic times, but a little more than half of all Americans are still considered to be thriving, according to a Gallup analysis.

    Gallup finds that for 2011, 52.5 percent of Americans would be considered thriving based on its analysis of people’s perception of their own lives.

    That’s actually a slightly lower percentage than in 2010, when 53.2 percent of Americans were thriving. But it’s an improvement over 2008 and 2009, when the economy was in worse shape than it is now.

    Still, that doesn’t mean we should pop the champagne corks. Gallup said that 43.8 percent of the respondents are considered to be struggling, while about 3.7 percent ranked as suffering. Both of those percentages increased slightly over 2010.

    Given the economic recession and aftermath we are still going though, it may come as a surprise that such a high percentage of Americans consider themselves to be doing well.

    That may be partly because the metric asks respondents both how they are faring now and how they expect to be faring in five years. Respondents are considered to be thriving both if they rate their lives well now and if they expect things to be going well in the future. The pollsters then use the self-described rankings to label the respondents as thriving, struggling or suffering.

    People who make more than $90,000 a year were much more likely to be described as thriving than those who make less money. Younger people also were more likely to be considered thriving than older people, according to Gallup.

  • Buzz: Rich vs. poor, digging out of debt, Facebook fumbles

    America has always prided itself on being the type of place where anyone with enough determination can climb the economic ladder.

    But these days, many Americans seem to be growing frustrated by the gap between those who are wealthy and those who are not.

    Our most popular Life Inc. post this week looked at a Pew study showing that most Americans see a strong or very strong conflict between rich and poor Americans. That perception has increased significantly over the past couple years, as the country has struggled to overcome the effects of the Great Recession.

    Many readers have clearly been angered by what they see as a growing disparity.

    “The poor fight the wars and work the jobs. The rich make money off of those endeavors. Job creators (yeah right),” one reader wrote.

    But others saw the conflict as more of a sign of difficult times.

    “The rich attack the poor for being lazy and the poor attack the rich for being greedy. The haves & have-nots always battle in tough times,” another reader wrote.

    If the weak economy has feeling more poor than rich, then chances are the holidays were especially tough. Another popular post this week looked at smart ways to dig out of that holiday debt.

    The post prompted a lively discussion on how to avoid getting into debt in the first place.

    “Your employer gives you only two opportunities each year to bring the entire family together: Thanksgiving and Christmas. Don't ruin it by paying off the credit card bills for the rest of the year,” one reader wrote.

    Hindsight is always 20-20, whether you’re looking at your post-holiday credit card bill or considering whether you really should have friended your boss on Facebook and then posted those photos of your wild New Year’s Eve bash.

    Another popular Life Inc. post this week looked at how the youngest members of the workforce may be inadvertently oversharingwith their co-workers on Facebook, to the possible detriment of their career.

    Some people said they had learned to be careful on Facebook, by keeping their boss and co-workers from seeing their posts. Others argued that people should have learned by now.

    “Facebook, facebook. At this point, it isn't like people don't know the bad things that can happen to them. It is that they don't care until they've paid the price,” one reader wrote. 

Jump to January 2012 archive page: 1 2