3 ms·
There is no difference between using NDP and GDP; the shift emerges only when you switch between PCE and CPI. It is totally about whether the PCE or the CPI is
by astazangasta 10y ago
There is no difference between using NDP and GDP; the shift emerges only when you switch between PCE and CPI. It is totally about whether the PCE or the CPI is a better index. We can see this clearly enough from the fact that there is a notch in the graph one way and not the other.
If you simply don't believe in wage stagnation, then I'm not sure what this whole conversation has been about.
- harryh 10y agoWage stagnation is definitely a thing, but it's due to increasing wage inequality between different employees not due to capital grabbing an increasing share of national income. Labor's share is remarkably stable over time: http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/FF467_charts_5.png http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/...
- astazangasta 10y agoGetting hard to find this thread again, but I've been enjoying this exchange... While that graph shows labor's share as stable, many others do not, e.g. in this piece by Jared Bernstein: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/why-labors-share-of-income-is-falling/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/why-labors-shar... Of particular interest to me is that if you look at the BEA numbers, they split 'labor share' into wages and non-wage compensation (benefits, SS, medicare, etc.) - the latter share has climbed over time to 20%, meaning much of the stability in the "wage share" is just increasing money being paid to Medicare. It's not clear what's being measured and not in that chart, but, for example, this St. Louis Fed data shows both an increasing Dividend share of GDP and a declining wage share of GDP: http://qvmgroup.com/invest/2012/09/05/profits-cash-flow-dividends-and-wages-as-percent-of-gdp-since-the-1940s/ http://qvmgroup.com/invest/2012/09/05/profits-cash-flow-divi...