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.
A new report from the Council of Economic Advisers this week explains the origins of that myth. The last two, bolded, are interesting and make sense.
Headline measurements use the Consumer Price Index, which has been known to exaggerate inflation.
These measurements also solely focus on cash earnings of American workers, excluding the value of fringe benefits like health insurance, taxes, sick leave, etc.
Part of the reason why official measures have understated wage growth is that the economy is strong and more people are joining the workforce.
Those new to the workforce are less-experienced and thus less-compensated, which is driving down the National wage average.
More-experienced, better-compensated Baby Boomers are retiring as well, depressing measured average wages.
This is a terribly sad thing for me to find myself saying, but for the first time, I feel that I can no longer trust information that comes from the White House. That's based on knowing how the Trump administration fired so many experts, staffed instead with ignorant newbies, directed people to ignore some factual information, and even removed factual information from their government websites.
So I can only tell you that many, many sources have agreed about wage stagnation, and I've seen statistics and graphs. I think I will stick to that until I see your information supported by serious, respected outside economists.
This is a terribly sad thing for me to find myself saying, but for the first time, I feel that I can no longer trust information that comes from the White House. That's based on knowing how the Trump administration fired so many experts, staffed instead with ignorant newbies, directed people to ignore some factual information, and even removed factual information from their government websites.
So I can only tell you that many, many sources have agreed about wage stagnation, and I've seen statistics and graphs. I think I will stick to that until I see your information supported by serious, respected outside economists.
Even if there's some common sense involved? Baby Boomers retiring at the top of their earnings and being replaced by new, at the bottom of the pay ladder, employees.
When I retired my school system was able to hire two new, Step 1 teachers for what I was costing them. When we went to Student Based Budgeting the per degreed staff number was @ $63K. Due to mass retirements it's now, seven years in, @ $58K (I only know that because a former colleague who was just appointed to the school's Leadership Team called me to explain it to him). The (now former and disgraced) Superintendent was able to tout his cost cutting prowess.
You do realize that the staff that prepares these reports are career civil servants and not political appointees, who are typically at the upper reaches of the Administration.
Even if there's some common sense involved? Baby Boomers retiring at the top of their earnings and being replaced by new, at the bottom of the pay ladder, employees.
When I retired my school system was able to hire two new, Step 1 teachers for what I was costing them. When we went to Student Based Budgeting the per degreed staff number was @ $63K. Due to mass retirements it's now, seven years in, @ $58K (I only know that because a former colleague who was just appointed to the school's Leadership Team called me to explain it to him). The (now former and disgraced) Superintendent was able to tout his cost cutting prowess.
You do realize that the staff that prepares these reports are career civil servants and not political appointees, who are typically at the upper reaches of the Administration.
Its not based on common sense. Its based on propaganda. Wage stagnation has been going on for decades now and the reason for it is pretty obvious. When we allow a tiny super rich elite to control the economic and political process, they will of course seek to pick the pockets of ordinary workers and transfer it to themselves. Why is Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce celebrating the war against labor unions? Because labor unions actually can balance the playing field a little bit between workers and capital owners. Stagnating wages is the obvious and deliberate effects of public policy. Who sets policy? The donor class. What do they want?
Wage Stagnation was a real thing under Obama and for the most part, it is continuing under Trump. Besides the "tax cut bonuses" businesses don't typically change wage structures because a new president takes office, nor when new laws are passed (mainly because most laws don't just cause effects over night and typically have a transition period of a few months to years.)
Wage Stagnation was a real thing under Obama and for the most part, it is continuing under Trump. Besides the "tax cut bonuses" businesses don't typically change wage structures because a new president takes office, nor when new laws are passed (mainly because most laws don't just cause effects over night and typically have a transition period of a few months to years.)
The only real wage boost legislation we have these days is at the state level with minimum wage increases.
If we want real wage increases, we need to massively strengthen labor unions and get big money out of politics. No other way. If people are not willing to organize by the millions to do that, then people cant expect the wage stagnation period to end, because the top 0.1% will fight tooth and nail to ensure an ever larger share of national income gets into their hands. And they can pay off even more representatives in Congress and in the court system to do their bidding.
A new report from the Council of Economic Advisers this week explains the origins of that myth. The last two, bolded, are interesting and make sense.
Headline measurements use the Consumer Price Index, which has been known to exaggerate inflation.
These measurements also solely focus on cash earnings of American workers, excluding the value of fringe benefits like health insurance, taxes, sick leave, etc.
Part of the reason why official measures have understated wage growth is that the economy is strong and more people are joining the workforce.
Those new to the workforce are less-experienced and thus less-compensated, which is driving down the National wage average.
More-experienced, better-compensated Baby Boomers are retiring as well, depressing measured average wages.
First of all, you're confusing "wages" with "compensation." Yes, if you include total compensation including benefits, then "income" has been going up, but I note that this has been going on for decades, and so you can't credit Trump (or any other president for that matter). But that's still not "wages," it's "wages plus everything else."
Second, I've actually been saying something similar for at least a few years - retiring baby boomers with lots of experience are being replaced by younger and, thus, lower-paid, millennials (directly or indirectly), but again, this has been going on for several years now and you can't credit Trump with this, if that was your intention.
I think wages have been stagnating for decades for many groups in the middle and working and lower class, but not for the upper class.
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.
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.
