4 ms·

Wage growth is a bit misleading without factoring out inflation. In real terms: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q https://fred.stlouisfed.org/

Wage growth is a bit misleading without factoring out inflation. In real terms: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q (Once you change the settings to YoY, the chart looks fairly unremarkable. Granted, it is only up to date to the end of last year.)

gruez 3y ago
> Wage growth is a bit misleading without factoring out inflation. The article literally mentions inflation right after, followed by what the real wage growth works out to. >Wages are growing at more than 5%: >insert chart here >And inflation is around 3%: >insert chart here >So we’re talking 2% real wage growth and 6% nominal economic growth. [...] I can see this being misleading if you used "Wages are growing at more than 5%" as the headline or something, but I don't think anyone is being misled unless they have the attention of a goldfish.
- bitshiftfaced 3y ago
  Yes, we read the same article. What I'm saying is misleading is the chart itself. The chart in the article supports a totally different conclusion than an inflation-adjusted chart. It doesn't actually support "Best economy since the 90s," and yet the author included it. That in itself is misleading to me, whether or not you hedge with a quick statement about inflation afterwards.
  - gruez 3y ago
    I'm not sure how you got the impression that the article claimed "Best economy since the 90s". The claim, made right after the remark about what real wages amount to is "The current environment looks more like the 1990s economy than the 1970s.". Looking at the inflation-adjusted wage chart, I'm inclined to agree. The pandemic screwed up the YoY numbers, but the past couple of quarters do look similar to the 90s.
    - bitshiftfaced 3y ago
      > I'm not sure how you got the impression that the article claimed "Best economy since the 90s" This is approximately what the blog post's headline is (from the parent poster to my original post). When I look at the real wage YoY growth chart, the past quarters look similar to many, many periods in previous decades, not just the 90s.

gruez 3y ago

> Wage growth is a bit misleading without factoring out inflation. The article literally mentions inflation right after, followed by what the real wage growth works out to. >Wages are growing at more than 5%: >insert chart here >And inflation is around 3%: >insert chart here >So we’re talking 2% real wage growth and 6% nominal economic growth. [...] I can see this being misleading if you used "Wages are growing at more than 5%" as the headline or something, but I don't think anyone is being misled unless they have the attention of a goldfish.

bitshiftfaced 3y ago
Yes, we read the same article. What I'm saying is misleading is the chart itself. The chart in the article supports a totally different conclusion than an inflation-adjusted chart. It doesn't actually support "Best economy since the 90s," and yet the author included it. That in itself is misleading to me, whether or not you hedge with a quick statement about inflation afterwards.
- gruez 3y ago
  I'm not sure how you got the impression that the article claimed "Best economy since the 90s". The claim, made right after the remark about what real wages amount to is "The current environment looks more like the 1990s economy than the 1970s.". Looking at the inflation-adjusted wage chart, I'm inclined to agree. The pandemic screwed up the YoY numbers, but the past couple of quarters do look similar to the 90s.
  - bitshiftfaced 3y ago
    > I'm not sure how you got the impression that the article claimed "Best economy since the 90s" This is approximately what the blog post's headline is (from the parent poster to my original post). When I look at the real wage YoY growth chart, the past quarters look similar to many, many periods in previous decades, not just the 90s.