bhupy

76 ms·

601.
by bhupy 6y ago
That's correct, but also not particularly relevant, as there's no society on the planet where low income salaries experience a higher absolute increase than higher income salaries. The fundamental point is: there's a narrat
602.
by bhupy 6y ago
I'm not convinced you actually read through either of those sources, especially considering that none of your quotes actually ever appear in them. First, and foremost, Piketty's findings are based on theoretical models , not empi
603.
by bhupy 6y ago
> Most people aren't going to spend a year as high level executives. I think you might be over-estimating what it takes to be in the top 5% Here are the numbers -> https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-calculator&#x
604.
by bhupy 6y ago
Those are sticker prices, which are only paid by the rich. The net tuition prices are a lot lower -> https://twitter.com/CPopeHC/status/1301975027147997189
605.
by bhupy 6y ago
Yes, household income is typically used because you only pay rent once per household, not twice. You typically only have one set of expensive appliances, furniture, etc per household, not 2. Also, household size has historically fallen -&
606.
by bhupy 6y ago
We typically use "household" numbers because you only pay rent once per household, not twice. You typically have only one set of expensive appliances per household, not 2 (or N), etc etc. That being said, this is a common (worthy)
607.
by bhupy 6y ago
The actual multipliers are a little more stark, unfortunately -> https://twitter.com/jmhorp/status/1221828310000271361
608.
by bhupy 6y ago
Correct, this thread (and the tool linked to it), breaks down what that looks like across localities -> https://twitter.com/jmhorp/status/1221828310000271361
609.
by bhupy 6y ago
> Are we comparing a person in one location to another? I thought we were talking about improvements year over year. We're doing both. And in both metrics, the bottom are the best off today than ever before. Unfortunately, the botto
610.
by bhupy 6y ago
If the top 1% get their income doubled, and the median doesn't change (even after accounting for inflation / purchasing power), then it's debatable if we even have a problem. If the bottom 30% income halved, you're corre
611.
by bhupy 6y ago
An interesting hypothesis, but even that hasn't been observed to be true: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AVHWPEUSA065NRUG In the '90s, the increase in income was partially attributable to employees puttin
612.
by bhupy 6y ago
His numbers are correct, because they never actually claimed that it was possible (on average) to put yourself through college in 1986. > In fact, I bet it wasn't actually possible to put yourself through college in 1986. Possibly,
613.
by bhupy 6y ago
Correct, which is why we adjust for inflation, and there are a ton of different inflation indexes one can use. Per the links in the source comment, regardless of which index you use , we have seen an increase in income. > Has their rent
614.
by bhupy 6y ago
The numbers don't necessarily represent how people put themselves through college, on average — it's just an apples-to-apples comparison of what it would take to "put yourself through college" in 1986 vs today.
615.
by bhupy 6y ago
> inheritances No, because this study analyzes historical tax filings, and inheritances are not counted as taxable income. > big insurance payouts On average, probably not, because big insurance payouts are (by definition) actuarial a
616.
by bhupy 6y ago
Median is immune to outliers, so it's generally what you want to look at even in spite of inequality. That being said, you can even look at the per-quintile levels -> https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time
617.
by bhupy 6y ago
These numbers account for those that are unemployed, but also these numbers are all pre-COVID.
618.
by bhupy 6y ago
There are a number of different indexes we use to adjust for inflation, and different people agree on which index is the best. That being said, per the linked source, the inflation-adjusted income has increased no matter which index you us
619.
by bhupy 6y ago
Some data to quantify that phenomenon -> https://twitter.com/jmhorp/status/1213150244160102400 It's a little harder to pay for college on a teenage wage than it may have been 35 years ago, but not that muc
620.
by bhupy 6y ago
This is another interesting data point. In 1997, it took 1,768 hours of work at the median wage to purchase a Dodge Caravan. In 2018, it took just 1,396 hours of work at the current median wage. In 1997, it took 1,565 hours of work at the m
621.
by bhupy 6y ago
Well, we're looking at the median here, which tells us what the lot of the "average American is". If you want to compare distribution curves, you can look at the income growth separated by quintile . That can be found here -
622.
by bhupy 6y ago
That's a separate argument, because at that point we're no longer talking about the standard of living of the "average American". That being said, across all quintiles (the bottom 2 quintiles include the clusters below t
623.
by bhupy 6y ago
That’s not true. As long as you’re taking into account the median purchasing power, it doesn’t matter what the shape of the distribution is. Real median income has increased regardless of the choice of inflation index .
624.
by bhupy 6y ago
It’s actually been quantified -> https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal... Based on the empirical tax analysis, 12% of the population found themselves in the top 1% of the income distribut
625.
by bhupy 6y ago
Low income salaries actually experienced a higher increase than higher income salaries between 2014-2019 (basically pre-COVID) -> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/low-wage-workers-are-getting-bi... And while Piketty&#x2
626.
by bhupy 6y ago
Salaries are indeed a lot lower, but the multiple of the median salary required to buy a home is a lot higher in the coastal metros. In other words, the salaries are nominally lower, but in real terms they’re actually higher. This thread ac
627.
by bhupy 6y ago
> Right, but that doesn’t measure how far away from the median the upper and lower clusters are. Well, it doesn’t particularly matter how far from the upper the median clusters are if their absolute standard of living has improved — and
628.
by bhupy 6y ago
I actually think we shouldn’t be surprised that the proportion of 25-year-olds that can afford to buy a house in the area they grew up in of some reasonable size is about the same as it was for boomers. But the emphasis should be on in t
629.
by bhupy 6y ago
I think it’s exactly correct that a post-secondary education is a reliable guarantee for an upper-middle-class way of life (depending on the degree, of course). That being said, it isn’t clear that those that go without a post-secondary edu
630.
by bhupy 6y ago
By definition, the “cluster” below the median is exactly half, regardless of the shape of the distribution. > Also CPI doesn’t really account for housing prices Per my source, the median income is the highest it’s been since 1981, and th

More ›