U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:23 AM
 
4,181 posts, read 1,710,330 times
Reputation: 13255

Advertisements

This article in the WSJ thinks so:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.350bdf868bc9
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:57 AM
 
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, originally from SF Bay Area
28,617 posts, read 51,313,182 times
Reputation: 29199
As always, the way data is presented can "prove" any point that someone is trying to make. By including other non-wage income (benefits, tax breaks) the report does reflect reality for many.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:59 AM
 
4,181 posts, read 1,710,330 times
Reputation: 13255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140 View Post
As always, the way data is presented can "prove" any point that someone is trying to make. By including other non-wage income (benefits, tax breaks) the report does reflect reality for many.

Yep. I'm actually agnostic on this. But CBO is generally trustworthy in their reports, making it food for thought amid a lot of spin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 09:12 AM
 
10,383 posts, read 5,035,459 times
Reputation: 6926
It’s not WSJ, it’s Washington Post. Two opposite newspaper.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 11:10 AM
 
11,774 posts, read 6,098,356 times
Reputation: 21695
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
Itís not WSJ, itís Washington Post. Two opposite newspaper.
Yep. A right wing rag. Of course, the WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch so you have to look carefully to see if something is actual news or a regurgitated Fox News OpEd.

Iíll stick with The Economist for data on this. Inflation-adjusted, wage stagnation is not a myth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 12:18 PM
 
17,783 posts, read 12,462,980 times
Reputation: 13103
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Yep. A right wing rag. Of course, the WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch so you have to look carefully to see if something is actual news or a regurgitated Fox News OpEd.

Iíll stick with The Economist for data on this. Inflation-adjusted, wage stagnation is not a myth.
How readily is data available to compare what an 18 or 28 year old earned 30 years ago vs their current earnings at 48/58? Even adjusted for inflation I would think more often than not in earned income scenarios theyíd be ahead. I will see if I can find something
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 12:22 PM
 
321 posts, read 165,459 times
Reputation: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Yep. A right wing rag. Of course, the WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch so you have to look carefully to see if something is actual news or a regurgitated Fox News OpEd.

Iíll stick with The Economist for data on this. Inflation-adjusted, wage stagnation is not a myth.

Why should inflation adjusted wage not stagnate? If someone does the same job year after year, why should his pay be any more than what inflation dictates?



I am talking about wage only. I know there is a big debate on whether the overall wealth growth of the country should be more equally distributed or not but that's a different debate. All the "news" articles that cry about wealth disparity conveniently forget that in a capitalist county, capital is king and whoever has more capital makes more money. You make more money by either managing your capital or by doing a higher level job, or both - not by staying at the same job level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 12:40 PM
 
17,783 posts, read 12,462,980 times
Reputation: 13103
So per the census data

Median income for persons age 25-34 in 1987 was as follows

Male 19,927(41,248 inflation adjusted)
Female 10,979(22,726)

Median income for persons age 55-64 in 2017

Male 48,863
Female 29,531
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,310 posts, read 13,432,534 times
Reputation: 14217
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver View Post
This article in the WSJ thinks so:
Yes, wage stagnation is a myth.

There's no evidence to support such a claim.

All of the evidence shows wages have continually increased, and wage increases have out-paced all forms of Inflation.

The only year wages did not increase was 2009, and in that year wages actually declined, instead of being stagnant.

Average wages in 2016 were $48,642 and $50,321 in 2017.

The percent change is 3.45%, while all forms of Inflation increased 2.18% over the same period, leaving a net gain of 1.27%

Average wage in 2010 was $41,673, so there has been a 20.75% increase through 2017.

All forms of Inflation increased 11.73% over the same period, so that results in a net wage increase of 9.02%

Average wage in 2000 was $32,154 so that is a 56.49% increase, while all forms of Inflation have increased 40.9% so that represents a 15.59% net increase in wages since 2000.

Average wage in 1990 was $21,027 so wages have increased 139.31% since then, while all forms of Inflation have increased 81.94% giving a net increase of 57.37%.

That debunks the whole wage stagnation myth.

We have additional evidence, because in 1990, 79% of Americans made $30,000 or less, while as of 2017, only 48% of Americans earned $30,000 or less.

So, wages are rising and wages are rising at a much faster rate than the rate of all forms of Inflation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Yep. A right wing rag. Of course, the WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch so you have to look carefully to see if something is actual news or a regurgitated Fox News OpEd.

Iíll stick with The Economist for data on this. Inflation-adjusted, wage stagnation is not a myth.
So you cite a Left-wing rag to back up your false claims. That's good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Florida
20,075 posts, read 8,456,154 times
Reputation: 16415
You would never know wage stagnation is not real if read the CD Work & Employment forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top