The rich are hoarding economic growth
1–10 of 157 posts
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#2This is why I appreciate the $15 an hour minimum wage movement. Paying people more is better then taxing the rich more. The super-rich own congress but at the city and State level there is depending upon the state some room to grow wages. Higher wages equals fewer people on public subsidies which is good for cities and states.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#31% real income growth per year is still fairly substantial IMO. Over a 41 year career, your purchasing power goes up by half, yet that's treated as "stagnating" which implies something far worse than 1% per year.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#41% real income growth per year is still fairly substantial IMO. Over a 41 year career, your purchasing power goes up by half, yet that's treated as "stagnating" which implies something far worse than 1% per year.
Not if inflation is 3-4% per year.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#5This is why I appreciate the $15 an hour minimum wage movement. Paying people more is better then taxing the rich more. The super-rich own congress but at the city and State level there is depending upon the state some room to grow wages. Higher wages equals fewer people on public subsidies which is good for cities and states.
Higher minimum wages means fewer employed people on public subsidies. It's less clear to me that it makes for fewer people overall on subsidies.
If the economic value of someone's labor is only $10/hr, they are less likely to be employed with a $15 minimum wage than a $9 minimum wage.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#61% real income growth per year is still fairly substantial IMO. Over a 41 year career, your purchasing power goes up by half, yet that's treated as "stagnating" which implies something far worse than 1% per year.
Not if inflation is 3-4% per year.
Real income growth is, by definition, after accounting for inflation.
The opposing term is "nominal income growth" which does not account for inflation.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#71% real income growth per year is still fairly substantial IMO. Over a 41 year career, your purchasing power goes up by half, yet that's treated as "stagnating" which implies something far worse than 1% per year.
Not if inflation is 3-4% per year.
"Real income growth" is the growth in income post inflation.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#8We know.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#91% real income growth per year is still fairly substantial IMO. Over a 41 year career, your purchasing power goes up by half, yet that's treated as "stagnating" which implies something far worse than 1% per year.
Not if inflation is 3-4% per year.
He said 'real' income growth, which I take to mean adjusted for inflation and maybe also various cost of living increases/decreases.
Re: The rich are hoarding economic growth
#10This is why I appreciate the $15 an hour minimum wage movement. Paying people more is better then taxing the rich more. The super-rich own congress but at the city and State level there is depending upon the state some room to grow wages. Higher wages equals fewer people on public subsidies which is good for cities and states.
Higher minimum wages means fewer employed people on public subsidies. It's less clear to me that it makes for fewer people overall on subsidies. If the economic value of someone's labor is only $10/hr, they are less likely to be employed with a $15 minimum wage than a $9 minimum wage.
What labor has value below the required amount to exist as a human? I think the reasoning is - if it's worth being done, it's worth paying someone a meager living wage to have it done.