[myNXTact]

>The truth, however, is quite different. For example, Clemson’s engineering enrollment has reached almost 5,300 students – an 80 percent increase since 2008!

Enrollment numbers for engineering students are not really relevant. It is the graduation numbers. Engineering programs are notorious for "weeding out" large numbers of students. His salary statistics are scary though.

[pmiller2]

How much of those salary statistics are just reflections of general trends? An 0.4% increase per year over 12 years compounds to roughly a 5% increase. Given the stats at http://proximityone.com/statetrendsmhi_20002012.htm , we see that only two states had an increase in median income higher than that (and one, ND, is surely due to an oil boom).

What I find more sobering is that the real US median income decreased 6.6% from 2000-2012.

[zanny]

If salaries are not going up, that is a real measure of demand being met. If the demand for engineers of X skill were not being met, the price for those engineers would continuously rise until either they became unprofitable to have or demand was met.

The reality is that tech companies just want to pay people less. Of course they do - every company wants to pay less for the same product. We have equilibrium today where tech workers equalize at a certain balance of supply and demand - if demand rose, supply would increase from more promising STEM job prospects driving more people into STEM - but demand is not rising, since wage offerings are not rising.

It is important that we as a society realize that while most jobs are going away - and through that process, the supply of labor is going through the roof as more and more people fight to survive on the scraps of demand for whatever skill they have are put out into the market - engineering in all its forms remains uniquely capable of maintaining equilibrium above the poverty line.

It is always a battle between the provider and the consumer. As predominantly consumers we are not used to fighting as the provider of a valuable asset. But as the provider we must fight to keep prices high to maximize our own profits - in the same way corporate interests will fight to maintain their own profit margins. They are not your friends, they want to use you as much as you use them as a means to an end - you wanted chocolate bars and coffee, and they provided at prices set by the market. They want engineering talent, and you offer yourself at a price you deem fair, and if you are hired - that was a price set by the market.

Don't let anyone deceive you into manipulating the market for their purposes. They want to drive up supply to reduce their own costs - if they had real demand for talent, it would be met.

[Outdoorsman]

>What I find more sobering is that the real US median income decreased 6.6% from 2000-2012.<

I think your point is very important...

My take is that this can fundamentally be attributed to our (increasingly full) participation in the "global economy"...

For years jobs have been out-sourced "within" countries by a process of competitive bidding...we Americans have done this for years and consider it fair...we refer to it as a level playing field...

Surprise...the global economy dictates that whoever is willing to do a good job cheaply--provide the same benefit at a reduced cost--has a very realistic shot at eventually filling a position...one way or another...

That's what I find sobering...regardless of your country of origin, or your particular skill set there are now many more just like you--equally qualified--who are willing to provide what you provide at a lower salary...

We're part of a "great leveling"...

[throwaway2048]

tell that to the 0.01% making far more than ever before

[Outdoorsman]

That's one (of many) of the reasons they're making far more...out-sourced labor...

[fweespeech]

Yes. In an actual labor shortage, you'd see salaries going up 5%+ due to competition for candidates.

If you see something on par [or even worse, less than] inflation, there isn't a shortage of any kind.