Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 573 posts

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#541

Post by smallmancontrov »

porridgeraisin wrote: post #522
smallmancontrov wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your incentives come from where your money comes from. This is a pretty basic concept and it's absurd to brush it off as a form of No True Scotsman. You can get money from both labor and capital. This is called "middle class." Don't let it melt your brain, but don't oversimplify to "you owned a stock so are capital class" either. Just give the labor/capital percentages (ordinary income / capital gains) and note how i…

Exactly. The original comment in this thread asked if most tech workers here are part of the capital class themselves. Which was answered by saying that if you're employed by someone else, you are part of the worker class and thus tech workers are part of the worker class. Introducing the fact that it's a spectrum and that equity ownership (which a vast majority of people in this industry have) makes you a capital ow…

No. If you agree with the "percent of income/gains" framework we have no fundamental quarrel, but I want to point out that the way you phrased your point was indistinguishable from partisan economic-right opposition to this idea, which aims to bait people into betraying their class interest by understating their labor interest and overstating their capital interest. "You own some stocks in your 401k so you are capital class" is the usual argument, but the overwhelming majority of non-retired people with a 401k get more income from working than from the appreciation in their 401k and should vote accordingly.

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#542

Post by mancerayder »

colechristensen wrote: post #479
mancerayder wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your theory is just that - theory. Just talk to someone who owns property, or do the research. Insurance costs, Up, energy, Up, when something breaks, it costs more to fix it. It's basic input cost math. I don't know what 'efficiency gains' means here. Maybe you're thinking of car production or software development. Insurance goes up due to climate change, due to insurance companies taking advantage of a poorly regul…

Times are getting worse and the landlord class is an unnecessary middleman. And again, the headline is the labor share of income is at an 80-ish year low. The landlord class grew too big. We want many of them to be forced out of the business either by law or by economic loss forcing sale. A home is a fundamental human right. Maintaining rental profits in the face of economic hardship is not.

You're repeating talking points that seem ideological in a response to a direct, falsifiable set of assertions. That's the most terrifying thing about ideologies, whether right or left - they just don't pay attention to debate or facts, but stamp repeated assertions religiously.

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#543

Post by WarmWash »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #496
WarmWash wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is how many people get $250k from their family and lose it all. Everyone's life is a mix of skill and luck, so to discredit skill, you would need to quantify the luck. An easy example is a lottery winner, a hard example is a Bezos. Any investor with the foresight to see what Bezos could do with grans money, would jump past her in line and give him triple.

> The question is how many people get $250k from their family and lose it all I don't think that really matters? The fact that they even had that shot at all is such an incredible opportunity above people whose family simply cannot afford to even try

But if you have the skill to turn $250k into much more money, anyone with $250k and that knowledge will give it to you.

There are far far more stories of investors giving nascent broke startups money than families.

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#544

Post by HEmanZ »

digitaltrees wrote: post #502
HEmanZ wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Median income in the US is much higher than $12-18/hr, it is about $30/hr. 25th percentile make $20/hr. 10th percentile make $15.58. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.htm So, the people you are mentioning making 12-18/hr, are literally below 1 in 4, to less than 1 in 10. These are not “average middle class Americans” except maybe in that higher end. These are low wage earners and are far below “average”. I mean…

They are within 25% of the of the median. So they are the lowest range of 50% of the bell curve.

Literally not a single one of those numbers is above the 25th percentile. 18 < 20.

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#545

Post by jodrellblank »

scottyah wrote: post #220
logicchains wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely is relevant to the discussion. Many Americans are ungrateful and envious of the Americans wealthier than them, in spite of the fact that their own living standards are still far far better than the majority of humans on the planet. And some of those hypocritically think that the wealth of richer Americans belong to them, but would never consider giving their own wealth to people across the globe who are…

The people who want money from people richer than them never want to give up their own to the people who look to them with the same eyes.

That is a false claim. Voting for taxation to support the less wealthy is almost a defining feature of what it means to be 'left'. Voting for taxation to support international aid and outreach and healthcare is very common. The 'left' supporting colonial- and war reparation payments is common. Donating money to charity, tithing, nationally and internationally is common across the board.

> "from people richer than them"

You may want to spend some time reflecting on where that money came from. How much lobbying and market manipulation, employee abuse, bullying, exploitation, wage theft, government (taxpayer-funded) grants and infusions of cash, bribery, corruption, dark patterns, law-breaking were involved, and how much tax avoidance and evasion was involved.

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#546

Post by eudamoniac »

tancop wrote: post #366
vondur wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't most of the tech workers here part of that 10% and I'd assume they own houses in some of the most expensive areas, so they are technically part of the capital class?

defining classes is complicated. if you do it based on income percentile it will always be arbitrary and never reflect actual economic relations. the most accepted way to divide in socialist circles is based off where your income comes from, your relation to capital. if you have to work for someone else thats working class (proletariat), if you can be independent you are professional or middle class, if you own the m…

What class is someone who is retired on savings but doesn't own any means of any production?

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#547

Post by 9rx »

porridgeraisin wrote: post #385
9rx wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I wouldn't call that abject poverty. But you could. There is no law of the universe that is going to stop you. Words are something randomly made up by humans. > it's just plain wrong. Again, words are completely made up, so it can't really be wrong in the traditional mathematical sense. It could be misinterpreted, perhaps. Of course that is dependent on how you've chosen to randomly make up "wrong".

I know it's against the rules, but oh my this reminds of me a certain other popular forum site in its heyday.

Yes, it is nice that there are still glimmers of the good old days of the internet.

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#548

Post by palmotea »

sapphicsnail wrote: post #495
palmotea wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The origin of the word is a bit darker than its meaning, unfortunately. We should all just stop speaking. The origin of too many words is problematic. Just think of how many were coined by racists and misogynists!

Are you aware of the irony of complaining about people being hypersensitive while you're overreacting to someone explaining why some people might find a word offensive?

You misunderstood me: I'm complaining about people being sensitive/offended due to the origin of a word. It's not a workable standard. Language changes and evolves, and the etymology should considered little more than a historical footnote not some significant, controlling thing.

If I open etymological dictionary and find out the word "pineapple" was originally coined to demean my ancestors (a fact I and a majority of people were completely unaware), what should the reaction be? Push everyone to start calling them Ananas comosus in everyday speech instead?

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#549

Post by eudamoniac »

lovich wrote: post #413
porridgeraisin wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh? Which tech company doesn't give RSUs to fresh grads? Startups of course give options. And how many american middle class+ (generalizing beyond tech workers) don't own equity?

You are in a bubble if you are surprised at the idea of companies not giving out stock, much less RSUs specifically. While it’s common in the big tech Silicon Valley companies there are thousands of other tech companies where the most they give are options, and I must repeat with a litany of caveats that make them effectively worthless, and even more where they only pay salary and have no way to gain equity at all. I…

I got RSU at Cisco, Boeing, Home Depot, not exactly FAANG tier companies

Re: The labor share of income in the US is at its lowest post-war level

#550

Post by eudamoniac »

lovich wrote: post #535
porridgeraisin wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering how my second paragraph was ignored, I assume you own stock in major companies either directly or through indices, thus making you a capital owner that makes money from other people's work (work used in the literal sense)? Note that around half of the US stock market is passively owned, so this is not a small number on aggregate Further see: my reply to a sibling in this same thread.

I “own” stock through my 401k. The “own” is in scare quotes because I cannot liquidate it other than as a loan for a home, and then only with my employers permission which is an odd definition for ownership and which most of the middle class in the US is bound by. Considering how you ignored the response to you asking > Eh? Which tech company doesn't give RSUs to fresh grads? Startups of course give options. I assume…

FYI 401Ks can be withdrawn from penalty free via a Roth conversion ladder.
Post reply on HN