Any report directly calls data discrepancy as "inequality" cannot be trusted. Anybody is entitled to own political leaning, but bluntly giving up impartiality in data reporting indicates the whole process of your data selection / analysis / report cannot be trusted.
Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
51–60 of 76 posts
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
It just means it's now harder for families to make it on a single income that used to be the responsibility of the father. This drives wages lower as we're seeing and makes it harder on everyone.
Logically speaking, it doesn't make any sense. It should be easier to start families because families earn twice as much. Practically speaking, people will spend their money on limited resources like land and basically lose out on most of the gains. That's the primary way "housing as an investment" earns money, by extorting the wages of future workers. If there are more workers (women and men) then you get to earn ev…
> It should be easier to start families because families earn twice as much.
In practice, it doesn't translate to immediately doubling the effective income. You hear many accounts of people whom their father was working a single job in a gas station, yet they afforded a house and car and other amenities. Today that doesn't happen anymore. Furthermore, the children will suffer when both parents are working.
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#53Why would you use the median - plot a boxplot in here and get some good data visualizations. Median barely tells the story. Poor data visualization is such a pet peeve...especially for a university.
A boxplot conveys more information about the distribution, but makes it harder to tell a concise story about comparing trends between multiple groups over time. Both are appropriate here.
True but you could put a boxplot for each time period and a line going through. I just feel like a lot of info was left out.
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#54Studying income inequality in the US by gender and age group while completely ignoring race feels wrong when it's such an impactful variable, especially considering it's getting worse over time. In 2016, the median net worth of non-Hispanic White households was $143,600. The median net worth of Black households was $12,920. Between 1983 and 2013, White households saw their wealth increased by 14%. But during the same…
There is a huge age gap between Whites and other race / ethnicity groups. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/30/most-common...
It has huge impact on both income and wealth.
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#55Who knew such an admiral goal: "having women entering the workforce en mass" would have such a depressing result: "it is now much more difficult for a family to survive on one income" What is the solution? Obviously, we would like to keep moving forward and allow anyone that is willing and able to do the job they want, but if anyone would like to be with their children, or take time off while a spouse works, that sho…
Did the lifestyle of people actually decrease from the 60s to today? I don’t think that is possibly true. Pretty much no American man would choose to go back in time and live in the 1960s (at the age of 25) given the extra purchasing power... or any intervening time in between.
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
It also means women have more independence and freedom.
Not necessarily, is selling your body on prostitution websites more freedom? I think not. It's known what women face in a secular captialism-first economy.
Yes, having the freedom to sell your body on prostitution websites is more freedom. I do not know what the rest of your comment means, but mine is pretty clear that not having to rely on a man to earn money and then give it to them is more independence and freedom than depending on a man to give them money.
PS Isn't it funny that a women "selling her body" on prostitution websites is bad, but a man (or woman) selling their body doing back breaking work for menial wages is OK?
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#57Who knew such an admiral goal: "having women entering the workforce en mass" would have such a depressing result: "it is now much more difficult for a family to survive on one income" What is the solution? Obviously, we would like to keep moving forward and allow anyone that is willing and able to do the job they want, but if anyone would like to be with their children, or take time off while a spouse works, that sho…
Did the lifestyle of people actually decrease from the 60s to today? I don’t think that is possibly true. Pretty much no American man would choose to go back in time and live in the 1960s (at the age of 25) given the extra purchasing power... or any intervening time in between.
I think the fact that people are trying to "Make America Great Again" means a lot of people would go back in time, especially men.
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#58Who knew such an admiral goal: "having women entering the workforce en mass" would have such a depressing result: "it is now much more difficult for a family to survive on one income" What is the solution? Obviously, we would like to keep moving forward and allow anyone that is willing and able to do the job they want, but if anyone would like to be with their children, or take time off while a spouse works, that sho…
> It seems to me the increases of efficiency should allow all people a minimum quality life(...), no matter their contribution to society. I think this can turn people that are a strain on the system to contributors How would they be contributors? I'm thinking maybe you mean that they will participate economically (buying stuff and making more babies). Is that really a good thing though, to have people who do nothing…
no, I mean if someone doesn't have a place to live it will be harder for them to get a job or go to school to get skills to get a job. There is still competition if there isn't people dying in the streets
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#59Who knew such an admiral goal: "having women entering the workforce en mass" would have such a depressing result: "it is now much more difficult for a family to survive on one income" What is the solution? Obviously, we would like to keep moving forward and allow anyone that is willing and able to do the job they want, but if anyone would like to be with their children, or take time off while a spouse works, that sho…
Did the lifestyle of people actually decrease from the 60s to today? I don’t think that is possibly true. Pretty much no American man would choose to go back in time and live in the 1960s (at the age of 25) given the extra purchasing power... or any intervening time in between.
People care about status at least as much as their raw level of purchasing power.
A 25-year-old American man in 1960 had more status in society than a similar man today.
Re: Lifetime Earnings in the United States over Six Decades
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
An idea that I really like is to do what countries like Singapore and the Scandinavian countries do: create a public sovereign wealth fund, and then do what States like Alaska do: divert the dividends from the fund directly to the people. Alaska's Permanent Fund is only allowed to invest in Alaskan companies and is "only" $75B in size ( https://www.alaskajournal.com/2021-02-24/fund-continues-bull... ), and even then…
> By scaling up the size and scope of the fund, you can conceivably get to a place where the dividend can work out to $10k+ per person per year. We've done that, except the dividends to go to a few rich families instead of to everyone.
Where have we done that? Keep in mind that we're talking about sovereign wealth funds funding a universal dividend; the closest we have to that is Alaska's fund, which provides an equal dividend to everyone regardless of income.