4 ms·

That's a patently false statement. Inflation has been 3% a year for decades and wages have stayed flat. Your example of home furnishings has been improved by

That's a patently false statement. Inflation has been 3% a year for decades and wages have stayed flat. Your example of home furnishings has been improved by industrialization. Property value have skyrocketed, vehicle prices have skyrocketed, college, healthcare... Things you NEED have become way more expensive. Luxury goods have gotten cheaper.

dlp211 9y ago
Wages have remained flat when inflation is taken into account, i.e. real wages are flat, nominal wages continue to increase. We also have seen upward movement in median household income recently, and we should expect that trend to continue. So the idea of flat wages may be coming to an end. What hasn't remained flat is the wages paid to the top N% which has greatly increased and accelerated the wealth gap. It is this gap that leaves people less satisfied despite being generally better off.
- MaybiusStrip 9y ago
  I would qualify: people aren't just dissatisfied because of the "unfairness" of growing inequality. The growth of the wealth gap has some very real ramifications, ie: on the distribution of power in politics.
  - greedo 9y ago
    As if the poor ever had any power in politics. Huey Long might have been a lightning rod for poor people, but it's not as if their votes have been courted since I've been alive.
sokoloff 9y ago
>Inflation has been 3% a year for decades and wages have stayed flat. Every time I read this claim and go looking for data, I find data that says that real wages are roughly flat, which means that they have kept pace with inflation. (That's the definition of real wages: that they are in inflation-adjusted terms.) It seems a common journalistic (and often political) talking point to say exactly what you said, which makes the math or reading comprehension challenged assume something quite different. While the author or speaker is not technically lying, they are merely misleading the reader/listener with a confusing (and sometimes confused) combination of nominal inflation and real wages. See figures 3 and 4 here: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ > Property value have skyrocketed, vehicle prices have skyrocketed This next chart is in nominal dollars (meaning, not inflation adjusted): http://ritholtz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/pricechanges.png http://ritholtz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/pricechanges.... It shows that vehicles have not gotten more expensive (even as they've gotten much, much better, safer, more reliable, etc) and that housing and food/beverages have inflated by less than wages and by roughly the same amount as general inflation (which is no great surprise, given that they are a substantial component of the inflation calculation and that it would be difficult to sustain inflation over a long period of time in a consumer-driven economy in the absence of [nominal] wage growth for consumers). College and healthcare have indeed risen much more quickly than wages or general inflation. Do you have contrary sources?
- mcguire 9y ago
  Figure 3: "When it comes to the pace of annual [real wage] increases, the top 1% wage grew 138% since 1979, while [real] wages for the bottom 90% grew 15%" Figure 4: "Middle-class wages are stagnant—Middle-wage workers’ hourly [real] wage is up 6% since 1979, low-wage workers’ [real] wages are down 5%, while those with very high wages saw a 41% increase" I wouldn't exactly describe those figures as "misleading". In fact, they're pretty clear: one group is benefiting much more than the others. As for the second one, is it really saying that real new-car prices have declined by ~50%?
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    IMO, the graphs show that the quoted statement is absolutely misleading: "Inflation has been 3% a year for decades and wages have stayed flat." I agree that they would likely not refute a different, unmade, point about income inequality. The second reference is saying that real new-car prices have declined by about 36%. ==> 1-(100/155.6)
- nickthemagicman 9y ago
  Median wages have decline by 4% since 2000. Median wealth has fallen by 28% in a decade. The middle class has been reduced by 11% since 1971. Even in the chart you posted, things people NEED have become steadily more expensive while wages have remained flat. Student loan debt has skyrocketed over 200% since 1990 which is needed in most cases for a good job. How is this not decline? * http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middl...

dlp211 9y ago

Wages have remained flat when inflation is taken into account, i.e. real wages are flat, nominal wages continue to increase. We also have seen upward movement in median household income recently, and we should expect that trend to continue. So the idea of flat wages may be coming to an end. What hasn't remained flat is the wages paid to the top N% which has greatly increased and accelerated the wealth gap. It is this gap that leaves people less satisfied despite being generally better off.

MaybiusStrip 9y ago
I would qualify: people aren't just dissatisfied because of the "unfairness" of growing inequality. The growth of the wealth gap has some very real ramifications, ie: on the distribution of power in politics.
- greedo 9y ago
  As if the poor ever had any power in politics. Huey Long might have been a lightning rod for poor people, but it's not as if their votes have been courted since I've been alive.

sokoloff 9y ago

>Inflation has been 3% a year for decades and wages have stayed flat. Every time I read this claim and go looking for data, I find data that says that real wages are roughly flat, which means that they have kept pace with inflation. (That's the definition of real wages: that they are in inflation-adjusted terms.) It seems a common journalistic (and often political) talking point to say exactly what you said, which makes the math or reading comprehension challenged assume something quite different. While the author or speaker is not technically lying, they are merely misleading the reader/listener with a confusing (and sometimes confused) combination of nominal inflation and real wages. See figures 3 and 4 here: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ > Property value have skyrocketed, vehicle prices have skyrocketed This next chart is in nominal dollars (meaning, not inflation adjusted): http://ritholtz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/pricechanges.png http://ritholtz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/pricechanges.... It shows that vehicles have not gotten more expensive (even as they've gotten much, much better, safer, more reliable, etc) and that housing and food/beverages have inflated by less than wages and by roughly the same amount as general inflation (which is no great surprise, given that they are a substantial component of the inflation calculation and that it would be difficult to sustain inflation over a long period of time in a consumer-driven economy in the absence of [nominal] wage growth for consumers). College and healthcare have indeed risen much more quickly than wages or general inflation. Do you have contrary sources?

mcguire 9y ago
Figure 3: "When it comes to the pace of annual [real wage] increases, the top 1% wage grew 138% since 1979, while [real] wages for the bottom 90% grew 15%" Figure 4: "Middle-class wages are stagnant—Middle-wage workers’ hourly [real] wage is up 6% since 1979, low-wage workers’ [real] wages are down 5%, while those with very high wages saw a 41% increase" I wouldn't exactly describe those figures as "misleading". In fact, they're pretty clear: one group is benefiting much more than the others. As for the second one, is it really saying that real new-car prices have declined by ~50%?
- sokoloff 9y ago
  IMO, the graphs show that the quoted statement is absolutely misleading: "Inflation has been 3% a year for decades and wages have stayed flat." I agree that they would likely not refute a different, unmade, point about income inequality. The second reference is saying that real new-car prices have declined by about 36%. ==> 1-(100/155.6)
nickthemagicman 9y ago
Median wages have decline by 4% since 2000. Median wealth has fallen by 28% in a decade. The middle class has been reduced by 11% since 1971. Even in the chart you posted, things people NEED have become steadily more expensive while wages have remained flat. Student loan debt has skyrocketed over 200% since 1990 which is needed in most cases for a good job. How is this not decline? * http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middl...