Taking students out of the discussion…how do our largest employers, TAMU, both cities, both school districts, both large hospitals stack up against other texas metropolitan areas when it comes to pay?

Apparently not well, as stated by the only article or study that's been presented with any real data in this discussion. All the feelings will tell you otherwise though

Nevermind. I forgot about my rule about not arguing with hyperbole.

I notice you highlight that part but won't respond to the fact that even under the "modified" numbers we are still worse than the state average.

Bottom line, BCS per capita retail spending lags behind places like Tyler and Victoria. That indicator is straight forward, simple and telling.

[Be respectful or do not post on this forum. -Staff]

Please go on and explain where I went wrong when I quoted the numbers you presented. Fun thing, you have thrown in some sort of not so veiled insult in every response you have posted, one thing I remember from debate class is that when people start using insults in an argument it is generally because that is all they have. If they could actually debate and prove their point the insults aren't needed.

It is what it is. Don't know what the discussion is supposed to be about. We certainly don't need to keep taxing these poor poor people for social programs.

Replied to wrong thread.

cslifer said:

---

I find it strange that everyone seems to want to deny or downplay the problem instead of looking for ways to fix it. Sad.

---

What do you think should be done?

How about trying to attract industry?

Again, I am no expert, but I've read plenty of stories about TAMU staff, not faculty, that need food assistance, and it is apparent that they are not making a living wage.

More specifically speaking, the janitorial staff.

Bucketrunner said:

---

Wouldn't it make sense for low income populations to gravitate to where better paying jobs were available?

---

Moving is expensive

wareagle044 said:

---

Bucketrunner said:

---

Wouldn't it make sense for low income populations to gravitate to where better paying jobs were available?

---

Moving is expensive

---

other cities are more expensive.....if you work here remotely on one of those city's salaries, you're doing pretty good.

b0ridi said:

---

woodiewood1 said:

---

A&M pays medical and hospitalization for the employee and lower for the family than many other employers. The drug plan covers most of the cost of drugs. A&M Matches most of the TRS or Optional retirement plan's employee contribution. A&M also offers additional attractive cost AD&D, life insurance, dental insurance, eye glass partial coverage, disability insurance. Also A&M employees get both vacation time and sick leave time off and that increased with longevity. Also, there is additions to the annual salary for longevity.. Many of this benefits are offered by the private sector and in many other cities. The total value of employment is much greater than the payroll salary. And if you work your last ten years of employment with A&M, when your age+service years reach 80, you get the medical coverage free forever.

---

These are pretty standard benefits for white-collar jobs at many places, not just A&M. A 7% match on ORP contributions isn't that impressive if your Admin Assistant II salary is $50,000. The $3,500 in employer contribution could easily be beat by getting a higher paying job in Houston.

---

You are correct but a large percentage of employees in the U.S. are not white collar workers working for corporations. The largest non-government/public industries by employment is fast food restaurants, office staffing, single location full service restaurants, retail sales, supermarkets and grocery and motels/hotel. I suspect that the majority of workers in those industries do not get A&M's level of employee compensation, especially the mostly free employee medical coverage while employed and for life after retirement..

My only point was in response to comments that A&M is a low-paying employer in our area . Not as low as many think if the whole package is considered.

lightswitch said:

---

Who knew?

Link to Article

College Station-Bryan, TX at 23.4% poverty rate. national poverty rate is 12.8%

---

College Station..

Quote:

---

In 2021, the median household income of College Station households was $50,089. College Station households made slightly more than Weslaco households ($49,767) and Mart households ($49,904) . However, 11.3% of College Station families live in poverty.

---

Bryan

Quote:

---

In 2021, the median household income of Bryan households was $49,181. Bryan households made slightly more than Overton households ($49,167) and Gail households ($49,167) . However, 17.8% of Bryan families live in poverty

---

There is quite a discrepancy between the OPs article (allegedly based on 2021 census) and the actual 2021 census data for College Station alone (does not include Bryan). Even if you include Bryan, I still do not see how they came up with 23.4%

https://www.texas-demographics.com/college-station-demographics#:~:text=Station%20Demographics%20Summary-,Population,Texas%20out%20of%201%2C799%20cities.

cslifer said:

---

How about trying to attract industry?

---

How did you do that? What supply chains would benefit being in BCS vs another area?

That is good on for, but do you have information on SSC?

Aggie1205 said:

---

cslifer said:

---

How about trying to attract industry?

---

How did you do that? What supply chains would benefit being in BCS vs another area?

---

Bryan has done pretty good at attracting industry.

Decent paying industry? I'm sure there's a data base of salaries somewhere for here.

TyHolden said:

---

wareagle044 said:

---

Bucketrunner said:

---

Wouldn't it make sense for low income populations to gravitate to where better paying jobs were available?

---

Moving is expensive

---

other cities are more expensive.....if you work here remotely on one of those city's salaries, you're doing pretty good.

---

Ahem. Like me.

I took my Austin salary and moved to Bryan. I have to admit I do love it here and things are way less expensive than they were in Austin.

As for how to fix things, there are a couple of different things you could do. The proximity to Houston and the fact that A&M is right here should make the greater B/CS area the next tech corridor in the state. That's how Austin blew up. Heck I hired interns from A&M in Austin every summer! Many would have chosen to stay in College Station but there is nothing here for
them. But the ultimate question here is, does the city and its citizens want that?

TyHolden said:

---

wareagle044 said:

---

Bucketrunner said:

---

Wouldn't it make sense for low income populations to gravitate to where better paying jobs were available?

---

Moving is expensive

---

other cities are more expensive.....if you work here remotely on one of those city's salaries, you're doing pretty good.

---

That's what I'm doing, it's the best move

cslifer said:

---

Taking students out of the discussion…how do our largest employers, TAMU, both cities, both school districts, both large hospitals stack up against other texas metropolitan areas when it comes to pay?

---

This is 100% spot on. Higher Ed, non profits, and government don't pay worth a crap. Unfortunately, rounding out the top 10 are Reynolds and Reynolds (who don't pay well), Sanderson Farms (see Rey Rey), and Fujifilm.

There is a real problem of poverty in the area. The local governments don't seem to want to attract any higher quality employers. The Wayfair call center didn't do it, either.

I also work remotely. Couldn't afford to live here otherwise.

The city and the state could kick in tax breaks to attract big companies. I mean, Apple, Samsung, Amazon, Tesla and Dell aren't paying city or state taxes in Austin and likely never will.

But there is another factor at play in Austin that some of us that lived there for a long time witnessed first hand. tu stifled a lot of progress for Austin, which is why a lot of the tech sector moved northwest of town. They also stifled any pro sports from even considering coming to Austin.

Perhaps A&M doesn't want competition for their top talent?

doubledog said:

---

lightswitch said:

---

Who knew?

Link to Article

College Station-Bryan, TX at 23.4% poverty rate. national poverty rate is 12.8%

---

College Station..

Quote:

---

In 2021, the median household income of College Station households was $50,089. College Station households made slightly more than Weslaco households ($49,767) and Mart households ($49,904) . However, 11.3% of College Station families live in poverty.

---

Bryan

Quote:

---

In 2021, the median household income of Bryan households was $49,181. Bryan households made slightly more than Overton households ($49,167) and Gail households ($49,167) . However, 17.8% of Bryan families live in poverty

---

There is quite a discrepancy between the OPs article (allegedly based on 2021 census) and the actual 2021 census data for College Station alone (does not include Bryan). Even if you include Bryan, I still do not see how they came up with 23.4%

https://www.texas-demographics.com/college-station-demographics#:~:text=Station%20Demographics%20Summary-,Population,Texas%20out%20of%201%2C799%20cities.

---

Not much to add except I have to question a study that compares Bryan to Overton and Gail. The population of both of them combined would barely equal one dorm full.

Also have to consider cost of living, as alluded to previously.

Charpie said:

---

The city and the state could kick in tax breaks to attract big companies. I mean, Apple, Samsung, Amazon, Tesla and Dell aren't paying city or state taxes in Austin and likely never will.

But there is another factor at play in Austin that some of us that lived there for a long time witnessed first hand. tu stifled a lot of progress for Austin, which is why a lot of the tech sector moved northwest of town. They also stifled any pro sports from even considering coming to Austin.

Perhaps A&M doesn't want competition for their top talent?

---

The biggest obstacle to a company that size moving to BCS is the lack of an airport within a reasonable distance. That's entirely why AT&T moved its headquarters from San Antonio to DFW. BCS is decades away from being able to attract an Apple or Tesla. As Houston grows if we see the city start pushing for a third airport we need Easterwood to be in that conversation. We're seeing McKinney talked about as the third major airport in DFW so it's not a crazy conversation but one that has to happen for BCS to attract that kind of industry.

As to the thread poverty exists everywhere. In 1964 the poverty rate in the US was around 15%. Today, roughly $35 TRILLION in entitlement spending later do you know what the poverty rate is? About 15%. There's not anything we can "do" to fix this on a macro level. Well we could cut taxes and eliminate welfare for the able bodied but those aren't politically acceptable in 2023 America. Generational poverty is real, far more real than generational wealth. Why? The welfare state incentivizes it. We'll always have poor people, that's just normal distribution. We don't have to give people a reason to stay poor though and that's precisely what welfare does.

Very well said.

Paper ceiling growing in momentum

LOYAL AG said:

---

Charpie said:

---

The city and the state could kick in tax breaks to attract big companies. I mean, Apple, Samsung, Amazon, Tesla and Dell aren't paying city or state taxes in Austin and likely never will.

But there is another factor at play in Austin that some of us that lived there for a long time witnessed first hand. tu stifled a lot of progress for Austin, which is why a lot of the tech sector moved northwest of town. They also stifled any pro sports from even considering coming to Austin.

Perhaps A&M doesn't want competition for their top talent?

---

The biggest obstacle to a company that size moving to BCS is the lack of an airport within a reasonable distance. That's entirely why AT&T moved its headquarters from San Antonio to DFW. BCS is decades away from being able to attract an Apple or Tesla. As Houston grows if we see the city start pushing for a third airport we need Easterwood to be in that conversation. We're seeing McKinney talked about as the third major airport in DFW so it's not a crazy conversation but one that has to happen for BCS to attract that kind of industry.

---

Samsung decided to build their 17 BILLION dollar plant in Taylor, Texas. The nearest airport of any size is 50 miles away. Bush is only 87 from here and we have a good airport for private corporate planes. The Taylor/Rockdale area has nothing attractive to a large comporation that BCS doesn't have other than cheap land and a community that really wants them.

It's a matter of the city fathers and development organizations really wanting to aggressively pursue the corporations. It could be done.

Taylor to ABIA is like 35 miles and it's a heck of a lot easier to get to than here to Bush.

woodiewood1 said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Charpie said:

---

The city and the state could kick in tax breaks to attract big companies. I mean, Apple, Samsung, Amazon, Tesla and Dell aren't paying city or state taxes in Austin and likely never will.

But there is another factor at play in Austin that some of us that lived there for a long time witnessed first hand. tu stifled a lot of progress for Austin, which is why a lot of the tech sector moved northwest of town. They also stifled any pro sports from even considering coming to Austin.

Perhaps A&M doesn't want competition for their top talent?

---

The biggest obstacle to a company that size moving to BCS is the lack of an airport within a reasonable distance. That's entirely why AT&T moved its headquarters from San Antonio to DFW. BCS is decades away from being able to attract an Apple or Tesla. As Houston grows if we see the city start pushing for a third airport we need Easterwood to be in that conversation. We're seeing McKinney talked about as the third major airport in DFW so it's not a crazy conversation but one that has to happen for BCS to attract that kind of industry.

---

Samsung decided to build their 17 BILLION dollar plant in Taylor, Texas. The nearest airport of any size is 50 miles away. Bush is only 87 from here and we have a good airport for private corporate planes. The Taylor/Rockdale area has nothing attractive to a large comporation that BCS doesn't have other than cheap land and a community that really wants them.

It's a matter of the city fathers and development organizations really wanting to aggressively pursue the corporations. It could be done.

---

Samsung was going to add to the existing plant on Parmer but rethought having it at the same location after some weather events. Taylor was far enough away that it was not likely to be hit by the same tornado but close enough to have employees spend part of the week in Taylor and part of the week at the parmer plant.

woodiewood1 said:

---

AG81 said:

---

There's much to disagree with in this analysis, as it cherry picks statistics to support a bias. That aside, I'm going to assume you just used the wrong word choice in this assertion, "The one thing that the University DOES do here is artificially depress wages. We have a constant stream of new graduates looking for jobs and many local employers are content to cycle new hires every few years to continue paying entry level wages. Texas A&M, for a large employer, has very low wages compared to market. I laugh every time I see "5 tears experience and Masters required, ....$13 per hour starting." So typical."

First, the University doesn't do ANYTHING to impact wages. And wages aren't "depressed" artificially or otherwise. It's basic supply and demand economics. There is far more labor chasing too few jobs, leading to lower wages. Both words, "artificial" and "depress" are words of action, as if it is being done deliberately. Next, employers AREN'T "content to cycle new hires every few years to continue to pay entry level wages". Again, they pay entry level wages because the labor market is over populated with prospective employees who are willing to work for entry level wages. Employers would gladly pay more to maintain business continuity and stability (I know because we own a business here) for employees who aren't graduating in 1-4 years. And, they (we) recycle employees every few years because we can't find qualified people to do the work, and students are just smarter and more dedicated among those within the available workforce (for the record, we pay WAY above entry level). Lastly, I challenge you to post a SINGLE job posting requiring "5 years experience and a Master's......$13 per hour starting". Just not true.

As for the rest of the post, yes, there is poverty in B/CS. But it's not nearly as pronounced as the data cited would indicate (presuming it's even accurate, which I doubt - meaning I doubt the validity of the data, not your recitation of it). If it were, those at the poverty level would move to cities in which opportunities are greater. You're just wrong in your premises and conclusions.

---

Also, College Station has a higher percentage of A&M workers than non-university or non-government centered cities. Although the pay may be somewhat lower at A&M than the private sector, the total pay package may not be too much different.

A&M pays medical and hospitalization for the employee and lower for the family than many other employers. The drug plan covers most of the cost of drugs. A&M Matches most of the TRS or Optional retirement plan's employee contribution. A&M also offers additional attractive cost AD&D, life insurance, dental insurance, eye glass partial coverage, disability insurance. Also A&M employees get both vacation time and sick leave time off and that increased with longevity. Also, there is additions to the annual salary for longevity.. Many of this benefits are offered by the private sector and in many other cities. The total value of employment is much greater than the payroll salary. And if you work your last ten years of employment with A&M, when your age+service years reach 80, you get the medical coverage free forever.

---

Where in the world did you hear about the medical coverage free once you hit the rule of 80? I think that was true for employees who may have started with the university prior to 2004, but I haven't seen or heard of anything like that. Plus...even current employees pay premiums/deductibles...so its never free. I'm not saying you're wrong...I'm genuinely curious because that would be an enormous cost to the state and I would be shocked (but happy ) if its true.

FishrCoAg said:

---

Not much to add except I have to question a study that compares Bryan to Overton and Gail. The population of both of them combined would barely equal one dorm full.

---

And that is the sad part