U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#11

Post by thaumasiotes » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 6:59 PM UTC

knuththetruth wrote: post #7

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #2

The statistics for gender are misleading. If you're just comparing the average wage of men and women then of course women are going to earn less: they work less than men on average. If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses). And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top…

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

Just for reference, feudal lords didn't have wages. If it was discovered that you worked for money, you were basically expelled from aristocratic society.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#12

Post by refurb » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:00 PM UTC

igravious wrote: post #4

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #2

The statistics for gender are misleading. If you're just comparing the average wage of men and women then of course women are going to earn less: they work less than men on average. If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses). And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top…

Will I believe you or will I believe the secretary-general for the OECD? “ We have reached a tipping point. Inequality can no longer be treated as an afterthought. We need to focus the debate on how the benefits of growth are distributed. Our report ‘In it Together’ and our work on inclusive growth have clearly shown that there doesn’t have to be a trade-off between growth and equality. On the contrary, the opening u…

There have been several papers that show the US is last in income mobility while having other papers show it's in the top 3. Suffice to say there is no consensus.

Also, measuring mobility by income quintiles is challenging as quintiles aren't the same across countries. You could move from 1st to 4th income quintile in one country and have a higher wage than some moving from 1st to 5th in another country.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#13

Post by watwut » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:01 PM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #11

knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

Just for reference, feudal lords didn't have wages. If it was discovered that you worked for money, you were basically expelled from aristocratic society.

That kinda depends on which version of feudalism we are talking about. They were not same.

Nevertheless, feudal Lords did competed among each other and parent talked about competition not about wage.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#14

Post by lkrubner » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:01 PM UTC

This is in keeping with a long term trend in which the standard of living for the median American has been allowed to stagnate for a long time. The male median wage has been stagnant or declining since 1973. This was previously discussed on Hacker News:

http://www.smashcompany.com/philosophy/do-men-become-warlike...

Also, consider that, when it comes to death-by-childbirth, the USA is among the very worst developed countries:

https://maternityneighborhood.com/the-case-for-care-model-in...

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#15

Post by knuththetruth » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:02 PM UTC

rvo wrote: post #10

knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

I don't think you understand what feudalism was/is...

No, I think I do. And so do a number of Silicon Valley "luminaries":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#16

Post by jeffreyrogers » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:05 PM UTC

knuththetruth wrote: post #7

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #2

The statistics for gender are misleading. If you're just comparing the average wage of men and women then of course women are going to earn less: they work less than men on average. If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses). And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top…

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

No, that's not what I said. I'm arguing for the same thing you are. But income inequality isn't itself a problem if there is mobility between the income groups. They statistics in the Bloomberg article show income inequality but don't show lack of mobility, and then say we've hit "a disturbing new threshold".

There may be lack of mobility along with income inequality, but the article doesn't demonstrate it.

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#17

Post by Consultant32452 » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:05 PM UTC

netfire wrote: post #8

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #2

The statistics for gender are misleading. If you're just comparing the average wage of men and women then of course women are going to earn less: they work less than men on average. If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses). And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top…

The same could be said for the racial-based statistics, since race might be tied to cultural opinions which could impact how many hours a week or years in a lifetime someone works.

Why should we care the reason people make their choices? What if I like surfing, so I decide to work part time which allows me to surf more? Does my skin color or gender matter? If I want to participate in this "surf culture," why would you feel the need to either force me to work more or demand that others subsidize my surfing habit?

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#18

Post by knuththetruth » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:08 PM UTC

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #16

knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

No, that's not what I said. I'm arguing for the same thing you are. But income inequality isn't itself a problem if there is mobility between the income groups. They statistics in the Bloomberg article show income inequality but don't show lack of mobility, and then say we've hit "a disturbing new threshold". There may be lack of mobility along with income inequality, but the article doesn't demonstrate it.

>I'm arguing for the same thing you are. But income inequality isn't itself a problem if their is mobility between the income groups

I'm not sure how you can't be arguing the same thing I am. The income inequality is what creates the immobility. This is demonstrated by other developed countries where there is less income inequality and greater social mobility, as others have pointed out. Can you elaborate?

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#19

Post by sbov » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:13 PM UTC

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #2

The statistics for gender are misleading. If you're just comparing the average wage of men and women then of course women are going to earn less: they work less than men on average. If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses). And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top…

> If you control for age and whether women have children the gap shrinks a lot (in some areas it reverses).

I generally agree with this line of thought, but you're also missing the higher level question: why, in our society, do we have to control for women who have children, but we don't have to control for men who have children?

Re: U.S. Income Inequality Hits a New Threshold

#20

Post by Retric » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 7:13 PM UTC

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #16

knuththetruth wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And an increasing share of wages going to the top income brackets isn't in itself cause for concern, only if the members of the top income brackets are largely static does it matter (since it means income is going to a small group of individuals, rather than a broader group of individuals who are swapped in and out of the top income groups). So a society in which there's competition to be among a handful of feudal l…

No, that's not what I said. I'm arguing for the same thing you are. But income inequality isn't itself a problem if there is mobility between the income groups. They statistics in the Bloomberg article show income inequality but don't show lack of mobility, and then say we've hit "a disturbing new threshold". There may be lack of mobility along with income inequality, but the article doesn't demonstrate it.

US ranks very low on income mobility. Some people get bumped when they sell a business, but even selling a home will not put most people into the 420+K income range of the top 1% let alone the top 0.1% which at $1,600,000/year excludes even many lottery winners.

PS: Don't forget the median US home is only worth $188,900, which means 1/2 of them are worth less than that.