3 ms·

These are more interesting graphs. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ki8y https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ki8y https://fred.

These are more interesting graphs. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ki8y https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ki8y https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ki8A https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ki8A https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=kipg https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=kipg Healthcare, education, and housing have all doubled since the turn of the century compared to median incomes. There are a few sectors of the economy that are absolutely crushing people who make a median wage.

IkmoIkmo 8y ago
On housing there are some caveats: - it's a consumer-driven market, higher prices made a lot of ordinary citizens rich. It's not money that disappeared into a few rich shareholders' pockets like say in the medical industry. - [0] mortgage rates have gone down from a peak of 18% to below 3%. That's the money that you'll never see again. Suppose you bought a home 3x your income, you used to be paying 54% of your income on interest alone, now it's 9%. Prices went up, but there was also downward pressure on your actual monthly expenses due to interest rates plummeting. - 'houses' aren't fungible over time. Home sizes are way bigger and household sizes slightly smaller. On average each individual has roughly twice as much home space as before. [1] We choose to live bigger and sharing our space with fewer people. That's at least a sign of shifting preferences, and at best a sign of wealth, not poverty. Caveats can be made about healthcare, too. We've added 8 years of life to each individual since the 1970s. That's insane. I'm less excited about education. I see signs of credentialism. Education still has positive returns for individuals, but the story isn't as strong as for societal returns (i.e., at some point the abundance of degrees become a positional good or in other words a zero-sum game). [0] https://i.stack.imgur.com/eKqLH.gif https://i.stack.imgur.com/eKqLH.gif [1] https://azgolfhomes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/American-Enterprise-Institute-Housing-Data.jpg https://azgolfhomes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/American-...

IkmoIkmo 8y ago

On housing there are some caveats: - it's a consumer-driven market, higher prices made a lot of ordinary citizens rich. It's not money that disappeared into a few rich shareholders' pockets like say in the medical industry. - [0] mortgage rates have gone down from a peak of 18% to below 3%. That's the money that you'll never see again. Suppose you bought a home 3x your income, you used to be paying 54% of your income on interest alone, now it's 9%. Prices went up, but there was also downward pressure on your actual monthly expenses due to interest rates plummeting. - 'houses' aren't fungible over time. Home sizes are way bigger and household sizes slightly smaller. On average each individual has roughly twice as much home space as before. [1] We choose to live bigger and sharing our space with fewer people. That's at least a sign of shifting preferences, and at best a sign of wealth, not poverty. Caveats can be made about healthcare, too. We've added 8 years of life to each individual since the 1970s. That's insane. I'm less excited about education. I see signs of credentialism. Education still has positive returns for individuals, but the story isn't as strong as for societal returns (i.e., at some point the abundance of degrees become a positional good or in other words a zero-sum game). [0] https://i.stack.imgur.com/eKqLH.gif https://i.stack.imgur.com/eKqLH.gif [1] https://azgolfhomes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/American-Enterprise-Institute-Housing-Data.jpg https://azgolfhomes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/American-...