3 ms·

Sorry, I'm not meaning to say that people aren't getting paid enough. My phrasing choice was poor. I mean to say, it's very difficult to inform policy from dat

by gen220 4y ago

Sorry, I'm not meaning to say that people aren't getting paid enough. My phrasing choice was poor. I mean to say, it's very difficult to inform policy from data with big inaccuracies. I'd say the grey economy is caused by myriad issues. But it's a space where people are able to meet their needs (on the employer and employee sides). Even though most of us on this forum wouldn't accept those conditions, hundreds of thousands of people do. It's a nuanced issue that requires a lot of thought and research, before jumping to conclusions about whether it's bad or not. Anyways, IMO, if we want to understand whether peoples' lives are sustainable with their present wages in NYC, we have to measure their actual wages, which is inclusive of this grey economy, unlike the reported data source.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
Not really. I mean if you want to have a stupendously high bar of confidence, and continually raise it so that no action is ever necessary or possible, then yes you need to spend many more years to understand every nuanced economic detail. For me idk, I've lived a lot of my life in poverty and on the edge of it, and large swathes of my social and family communities still do. I don't need more proof. It's very obvious that most workers are not compensated adequately and this data confirms it unless you really really don't want it to.
- gen220 4y ago
  I agree that we don't need the full picture to take meaningful action. I thought it was important to bring attention to the grey economy aspect, because so much of NYC would literally not function at all without it, and its existence and scale does have a meaningful impact on how you interpret this report (i.e. that the report is directionally correct, but its unbelievable magnitude is evidence that we can't reduce something as complex as poverty to a single number, especially when that number is essentially employee and employer-reported income).

by gen220 4y ago

giraffe_lady 4y ago

Not really. I mean if you want to have a stupendously high bar of confidence, and continually raise it so that no action is ever necessary or possible, then yes you need to spend many more years to understand every nuanced economic detail. For me idk, I've lived a lot of my life in poverty and on the edge of it, and large swathes of my social and family communities still do. I don't need more proof. It's very obvious that most workers are not compensated adequately and this data confirms it unless you really really don't want it to.

gen220 4y ago
I agree that we don't need the full picture to take meaningful action. I thought it was important to bring attention to the grey economy aspect, because so much of NYC would literally not function at all without it, and its existence and scale does have a meaningful impact on how you interpret this report (i.e. that the report is directionally correct, but its unbelievable magnitude is evidence that we can't reduce something as complex as poverty to a single number, especially when that number is essentially employee and employer-reported income).