3 ms·
It's really frustrating that articles like this never state if they are comparing inflation-adjusted numbers or not.
by ____nope 10y ago
It's really frustrating that articles like this never state if they are comparing inflation-adjusted numbers or not.
- x1798DE 10y agoIf they weren't using inflation-adjusted numbers, I'm pretty sure that would be MUCH bigger news. Assuming people have their kids at 25, that would mean, in inflation adjusted terms, that would correspond to a 40% DROP in inter-generational income for the population mentioned here. Just assume that all newspaper headlines will use the version that maximizes sensationalism.
- jat850 10y ago"In our baseline analysis, we measure income in pre-tax dollars at the household level when parents and children are approximately thirty years old, adjusting for inflation using the CPI-U-RS." It wasn't easy to spot but was mentioned.
- drcode 10y agoSo essentially this whole debate centers around how realistic one thinks the CPI-U-RS rates are... If you think they underestimate the purchasing power of money in 2016, then you'll disagree with the conclusions of the washpost article.