3 ms·

> all this while the productivity they generate is at an all time high I see this claim repeated a lot but you didn't say where it comes from so it's a bit har

by kmod 4y ago

> all this while the productivity they generate is at an all time high I see this claim repeated a lot but you didn't say where it comes from so it's a bit hard to discuss. In particular, you are making a claim about the productivity of low earners but I don't think this is something that is measured in the US? My understanding is the BLS computes industry-wide productivity measures, ie mean productivity (as opposed to say median productivity), and one would expect this distribution to be significantly right-tailed and the mean to be mostly influenced by the right tail. I haven't seen any data that breaks down productivity growth by income, so if you have a source for your claim I'd love to update myself. When I search for "productivity growth by income" I see versions of your claim but again they are all about population _means_.

uoaei 4y ago
- PubliusMI 4y ago
jrajav 4y ago
There are several sources that measure with this in mind, focusing on production and non-supervisory workers, or by breaking it down by sector. Here's one such: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ I haven't yet seen a source, whether it's a total average measure or bucketed, that doesn't at least show that productivity has always continued increasing year-over-year - not always at pace with GDP growth, but "productivity at an all-time high" still holds true. I think this tracks intuitively too, given that we continue to add infrastructure and technology to support production and services. The key point is that lowest earner's share of income has consistently decreased at the same time. That discrepancy alone, and the fact that the discrepancy has been allowed to widen for many decades now, is what gets us to the situation we're in today.
- PubliusMI 4y ago
  Even if all laborers and professions have enjoyed productivity gains, if those gains favor higher-earners more, then the share of income of the lowest-earners will consistently do down... Is there something wrong with that?
  - jrajav 4y ago
    Yes, because of the other fact that lowest earners' wages have stagnated for decades in the face of those gains and are currently unlivable.
  - jjulius 4y ago
    ... this comment has got to be missing a "/s" at the end.

by kmod 4y ago

uoaei 4y ago

PubliusMI 4y ago

jrajav 4y ago

There are several sources that measure with this in mind, focusing on production and non-supervisory workers, or by breaking it down by sector. Here's one such: https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ I haven't yet seen a source, whether it's a total average measure or bucketed, that doesn't at least show that productivity has always continued increasing year-over-year - not always at pace with GDP growth, but "productivity at an all-time high" still holds true. I think this tracks intuitively too, given that we continue to add infrastructure and technology to support production and services. The key point is that lowest earner's share of income has consistently decreased at the same time. That discrepancy alone, and the fact that the discrepancy has been allowed to widen for many decades now, is what gets us to the situation we're in today.

PubliusMI 4y ago
Even if all laborers and professions have enjoyed productivity gains, if those gains favor higher-earners more, then the share of income of the lowest-earners will consistently do down... Is there something wrong with that?
- jrajav 4y ago
  Yes, because of the other fact that lowest earners' wages have stagnated for decades in the face of those gains and are currently unlivable.
- jjulius 4y ago
  ... this comment has got to be missing a "/s" at the end.