4 ms·
There is an argument that the problems people see with both 'real wage stagnation' and 'increased divorce rates' are really problems caused by measuring the wro
by lsc 9y ago
There is an argument that the problems people see with both 'real wage stagnation' and 'increased divorce rates' are really problems caused by measuring the wrong thing.
The argument is quite clear when it comes to the divorce rate; Being alone, if financially tenable, is better than being in a bad relationship, so if you make being alone financially tenable for another half of the population, divorce rates will go up, and in that case, it becomes quite difficult to argue that increased divorce rates are bad. In fact, one could argue the opposite, that increased divorce rates indicate people being able to leave unpleasant relationships.
The argument is a lot less clear for wages. The strongest argument, I think, is that if you are measuring average per worker pay, women on average make less than men, and thus you will get a lower rate for 'average worker' than for 'average male worker' - even today, those numbers are stark, and before the 1970s, your 'average worker' demographics looked a lot more like what you'd see in today's "average male worker" statistics; I think you'll find that 'average male pay' has climbed rather a lot more than 'average pay'
The other argument, I think, is a lot weaker; if you double the number of workers, some would argue, you will naturally depress wages. (Of course, others would argue that the secondary effects of having more workers in an economy would make the economy more wealthy and drive wages up overall.)
- mrep 9y ago> women on average make less than men, and thus you will get a lower rate for 'average worker' than for 'average male worker' - even today I've also heard that is attributable to woman having to bear the brunt of childbirth.
- dredmorbius 9y agoA case of strongly-established gender-related differential in labour effectiveness.
- dredmorbius 9y agoA case of strongly-established gender-related differential in labour effectiveness.
- lsc 9y agothe reason is not particularly relevant to the point I was making; Just to be clear, I disagree with your assessment of the reasons for the disparity in pay, my own life experiences and education cause me to assign the disparity largely to irrational bias, but certainly I don't know of any good evidence either way. I'm just saying that whatever the reason for the disparity in pay, adding a group of workers who make less to the average is going to push down that average.
- rtpg 9y agoRE your second argument: population increases have always been happening, so why would it only be from the 70s that it would finally depress wage growth?
- bonzini 9y agoExponential growth won't last forever. Pretty much everything that looks exponential is actually logistic. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function
- mrep 9y agoEh, I don't know about that (at least on time frames of a typical human lifespan). For long term things, maybe. Do you have any good reads on that relationship?
- bonzini 9y agoSure, the time frame will vary. But exponential economic growth started much early than the '70s, we just happen to be around when the logistic curve starts to slow down (for population too).
- lsc 9y agoYup, that's why I was saying that it's a much weaker argument, because it is a much weaker argument. If I was going to add more evidence for that argument, I would point out that women were added to the workforce at a rate that is greater than what population growth usually is, but certainly, there is a good case to be made that adding more workers doesn't always push down wages.
- dredmorbius 9y agoA twin-engine plane with two good engines, and the capability to fly on one alone, is safer than a single-engine plane. A twin-engine plane with two fault-prone engines, where the failure of one can result in the failure of the other, and without the ability to fly on a single (or no) engines, is not safer than a single-engine plane. Marriage in an environment of high employment risks, and where the marriage itself can contribute to personal risks (abuse, legal, financial, or others) may well not be an attractive, or stable, institution.