Premium rate indices are calculated based on data from 51 jurisdictions, for rates in effect as of Jan. 1, 2014. The 2014 median value is $1.85, which is a drop of 2 percent from the $1.88 median of the 2012 study. Oregon’s premium rate index is $1.37 per $100 of payroll, or 74 percent of the national median. National premium rate indices range from a low of $0.88 in North Dakota, to a high of $3.48 in California.
Economic activity in the Twelfth District continued to improve moderately during the reporting period of mid-August through late September. Overall price and wage inflation remained modest. Retail sales grew slightly, and demand for business and consumer services increased moderately. Overall manufacturing activity picked up, while agricultural conditions were mixed. Real estate activity advanced, but growth in the residential sector varied across the District. Loan demand increased moderately.
In 2013, exports of goods and services directly and indirectly supported an estimated 11.3 million U.S. jobs. Goods exports which consist of manufactured products, agricultural products, natural resources, and used/ second hand products supported 7.1 million jobs while the export of services accounted for the remaining 4.2 million jobs supported nationally.
California’s per-job costs are higher than every other Western state, and most other large states. The high cost of creating additional jobs puts California at a substantial competitive disadvantage when attempting to retain or attract businesses that have a choice where to locate.
This spring, payroll employment in the US reached an all-time high, finally surpassing the pre-recession peak of 138.4 million jobs in the first quarter of 2008. At that time many said that the 8.7 million jobs lost in the Great Recession had at last been re-gained. However, they are not the same jobs that were lost, nor will unemployment have returned to a level less than the 5% of 2008. Much press reporting during this long economic recovery has expressed worry that low wage jobs dominate the labor market rebound, that the middle income household has not advanced economically, and that most of the income gains of the US have gone to those with high incomes, skewing the distribution of income in the US towards the wealthy or high-income earners.
The topic of income inequality and its effects has been the subject of countless analysis stretching back generations and crossing geopolitical boundaries. Despite the tendency to speak about this issue in moral terms, the central questions are economic ones: Would the U.S. economy be better off with a narrower income gap? And, if an unequal distribution of income hinders growth, which solutions could do more harm than good, and which could make the economic pie bigger for all?
In its new Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households, the Federal Reserve Board provides a snapshot of the self-perceived financial and economic well-being of U.S. households and the issues they face, based on responses to the Board’s 2013 Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking. The report provides insight into numerous topics of current relevance to household finances, including: housing and living arrangements; credit access and behavior; education and student loan debt; savings; retirement; and health expenses.
The Thumbtack.com Small Business Friendliness Survey is an annual, nationwide survey that asks ownerCoperators of small businesses about what it’s like to do business where they live. The survey aims to learn what creates a healthy, vibrant local business environment by asking the ownerCoperators of small businesses themselves about these issues. This year we use the survey data to grade 38 states and 82 metropolitan regions according to their performance along various metrics.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation has released its annual Enterprising States study, offering an in-depth look at the free enterprise policies being implemented to promote economic growth at the state and local levels. . . The 2014 report relates these policies and practices to the need for collaboration between education, workforce development, and economic development to positively combat the nation’s growing skills gap.
A University of Virginia Miller Center commission, chaired by former Governors Haley Barbour and Evan Bayh, released a report offering innovative, non-partisan, actionable ideas on how to create middle-class manufacturing jobs.
But recent research shows that dynamism is slowing down. Business churning and new firm formations have been on a persistent decline during the last few decades, and the pace of net job creation has been subdued. This decline has been documented across a broad range of sectors in the U.S. economy, even in high-tech.
It has become increasingly clear that economically, California is becoming increasingly divided between its prosperous coastal counties and its struggling inland counties. That split has made it important for the state’s leaders to recognize that policies that appear to make sense to those representing the state’s successful areas may be generating unintended negative consequences to the parts of the state outside of their frame of reference.
Contrary to the oft-repeated claim that high-income Californians pay an unfair amount of taxes, it is actually California’s low-income households who pay the largest share of their incomes in state and local taxes. Given widening income inequality over the last generation, and the ongoing economic challenges facing Californians in the aftermath of the Great Recession, policymakers could take specifi c steps to reduce the regressive nature of California’s system of state and local taxes and to promote economic security for low-income families.
For nearly two decades, the Tax Foundation has published an estimate of the combined state and local tax burden shouldered by the residents of each of the fifty states, regardless of the jurisdictions to which those taxes are paid. We argue that it is important to note that a taxpayer’s true tax burden must include the substantial taxes they pay directly or indirectly to out-of-state governments.
We explore a number of reasons for the declines in geographic and labor market transitions, and find the strongest support for explanations related to a decrease in the net benefit to changing employers. Our preferred interpretation is that the distribution of relevant outside offers has shifted in a way that has made labor market transitions, and thus geographic transitions, less desirable to workers.