3 ms·
From your own source: https://s2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/WphI5hi8meGKLNEtu6eygg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://l.yimg.com/os/publish-images/finance/2015-01-
by nostromo 12y ago
From your own source:
https://s2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/WphI5hi8meGKLNEtu6eygg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://l.yimg.com/os/publish-images/finance/2015-01-27/3603d370-a637-11e4-aaa8-7dade6203616_HHI.JPG https://s2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/WphI5hi8meGKLNEtu6eygg--/...
So, incomes were flat or down for 14 years, and have since slightly rebounded to be just 4% less than in 2000, not 8% like they were. Shall I pop the champagne or do you want to?
- seizethecheese 12y agoYour data is for households. One recent trend is that households are getting smaller which skews household statistics.
- thedufer 12y agoNeither income nor unemployment is back to previous normal levels. How exactly is this evidence that there's no correlation between the two?
- adventured 12y agoOf course wages were flat or down, there hasn't been a particularly strong - or sustained strength - labor market since 2000. In the 2005-2007 time frame there was a brief respite, and that of course was not only fake (powered by the housing bubble) but crashed. Fact is, once enough slack is removed from a labor pool, wages rise. Happens every time. It's exactly what occurred in the 1980s and 1990s. Wages weren't booming in the 1990s until the unemployment rate got to a certain low level toward the last several years of the decade. I wouldn't expect wages to rise when U3 unemployment is 7% or 8%. I would expect to see it at closer to the 4% to 6% range. That's historically what has been the case, and we're seeing it happen again right now. If we add another ~3 million jobs in 2015, wages will rise at a healthy clip.