Income Stagnation...There Isn't Any!

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
This brilliant quip is attributed to Benjamin Disraeli.


It is illustrative of the fact that bogus and/or misread statistics are used by the Left to persuade the populace that they are being cheated, their income stagnated, through no faults of their own, while the 'rich get richer."

Sadly....the ploy is eminently successful with the 'less than informed.'






1. The current version of the ploy is 'income inequality.'
It is as much a lie as most of the other gambits and fabrications the Left uses to mislead, and to accrue power.
The basic lie is "you should be doing a lot better...you're being cheated by the greedy 1%....we are the only ones that care about you!"

a. First of all...there is no perennial group in America known as the "1%." It is merely a snapshot of the economy at the moment: economic mobility constantly moves folks in and out of said group, and every other economic quintile.

“Of individuals who were in the lowest income quintile in 1975, 5.1 percent were still there in 1991, 14.6 percent had moved up to the second quintile, 21 percent to the middle quintile, 30.3 percent to the fourth quintile and 29 percent to the highest quintile. Of those in the highest quintile in 1975, 62.5 percent were still there in 1991, while 0.9 percent had fallen all the way to the bottom fifth.” http://www.dallasfed.org/fed/annual/1999p/ar95.pdf


b. And...to disabuse oneself of any idea that the Left cares about anyone....simply look at the party that has led the 10 worst performing cities for half a century, and the truth is staring you in the face.
. DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP!

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn’t elected
a Republican mayor since 1961;

Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn’t elected one since 1954;

Cincinnati, OH (3rd)… since 1984;

Cleveland, OH (4th)… since 1989;

Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican Mayor;

St. Louis, MO (6th)…. since 1949;

El Paso, TX (7th) has never had a Republican Mayor;

Milwaukee, WI (8th)… since 1908;

Philadelphia, PA (9th)… since 1952;

Newark, NJ (10th)… since 1907.
Top 10 Poorest Cities run by Democrats « Scattershooting





2. Now, how about 'economic stagnation'...the idea that there has been little or no growth in the wealth of the average citizen.

a. “In the 25 years from 1980 to 2004, a period during which U.S. gross domestic product per person grew by almost two-thirds, the wages of the typical worker actually fell slightly after accounting for inflation.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101051.html

b. Here is where that Disraeli quote comes in. The statistics that claim the above fail to include the value of benefits such as health insurance and retirement benefits, etc., which have represented a growing share of compensation over the years.
See Cox and Alm, “The Myths of Rich and Poor,” p.21


c. The w2 is not what you get in compensation.....the benefits represent about 30% in addition to salary.
If 30% Of Pay Is Benefits, What About Independent Contractors? - Forbes


d. And....the hidden increases:
The stock market boom of the ‘90’s caused IRA and 401(k) plans to triple: http://federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/Current/annuals/a1995-2004.pdf

Yet while the largest part of the gain went to the bottom 99% of income earners, none was reported on income tax returns, and therefore none of it showed up in income distribution studies based on income tax return data.

But the greatest part of the capital gains of the rich were outside such accounts and thus were reported on returns. This exaggerated and misidentified changes in income distribution.

Capital gains tax rate cuts in ’97 and in 2003 caused a surge in reportable capital gains realizations outside of tax-protected retirement accounts. The sharp cut in the rate on dividends in 2003 caused a similar surge in dividends paid and reported. These changes caused distortions in comparing trends in incomes for top income earners versus others.


e. Nor do these sophists separated full time workers from part time (part time work has been growing, another indicator of rising prosperity). Of course, including the weekly wages of part timers pulls down the statistical average.



So...am I disputing that incomes have 'stagnated'?

You betcha.'
 

RandomVariable

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
5,103
Reaction score
359
Points
85
"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
This brilliant quip is attributed to Benjamin Disraeli.


It is illustrative of the fact that bogus and/or misread statistics are used by the Left to persuade the populace that they are being cheated, their income stagnated, through no faults of their own, while the 'rich get richer."

Sadly....the ploy is eminently successful with the 'less than informed.'






1. The current version of the ploy is 'income inequality.'
It is as much a lie as most of the other gambits and fabrications the Left uses to mislead, and to accrue power.
The basic lie is "you should be doing a lot better...you're being cheated by the greedy 1%....we are the only ones that care about you!"

a. First of all...there is no perennial group in America known as the "1%." It is merely a snapshot of the economy at the moment: economic mobility constantly moves folks in and out of said group, and every other economic quintile.

“Of individuals who were in the lowest income quintile in 1975, 5.1 percent were still there in 1991, 14.6 percent had moved up to the second quintile, 21 percent to the middle quintile, 30.3 percent to the fourth quintile and 29 percent to the highest quintile. Of those in the highest quintile in 1975, 62.5 percent were still there in 1991, while 0.9 percent had fallen all the way to the bottom fifth.” http://www.dallasfed.org/fed/annual/1999p/ar95.pdf


b. And...to disabuse oneself of any idea that the Left cares about anyone....simply look at the party that has led the 10 worst performing cities for half a century, and the truth is staring you in the face.
. DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP!

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn’t elected
a Republican mayor since 1961;

Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn’t elected one since 1954;

Cincinnati, OH (3rd)… since 1984;

Cleveland, OH (4th)… since 1989;

Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican Mayor;

St. Louis, MO (6th)…. since 1949;

El Paso, TX (7th) has never had a Republican Mayor;

Milwaukee, WI (8th)… since 1908;

Philadelphia, PA (9th)… since 1952;

Newark, NJ (10th)… since 1907.
Top 10 Poorest Cities run by Democrats « Scattershooting





2. Now, how about 'economic stagnation'...the idea that there has been little or no growth in the wealth of the average citizen.

a. “In the 25 years from 1980 to 2004, a period during which U.S. gross domestic product per person grew by almost two-thirds, the wages of the typical worker actually fell slightly after accounting for inflation.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101051.html

b. Here is where that Disraeli quote comes in. The statistics that claim the above fail to include the value of benefits such as health insurance and retirement benefits, etc., which have represented a growing share of compensation over the years.
See Cox and Alm, “The Myths of Rich and Poor,” p.21


c. The w2 is not what you get in compensation.....the benefits represent about 30% in addition to salary.
If 30% Of Pay Is Benefits, What About Independent Contractors? - Forbes


d. And....the hidden increases:
The stock market boom of the ‘90’s caused IRA and 401(k) plans to triple: http://federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/Current/annuals/a1995-2004.pdf

Yet while the largest part of the gain went to the bottom 99% of income earners, none was reported on income tax returns, and therefore none of it showed up in income distribution studies based on income tax return data.

But the greatest part of the capital gains of the rich were outside such accounts and thus were reported on returns. This exaggerated and misidentified changes in income distribution.

Capital gains tax rate cuts in ’97 and in 2003 caused a surge in reportable capital gains realizations outside of tax-protected retirement accounts. The sharp cut in the rate on dividends in 2003 caused a similar surge in dividends paid and reported. These changes caused distortions in comparing trends in incomes for top income earners versus others.


e. Nor do these sophists separated full time workers from part time (part time work has been growing, another indicator of rising prosperity). Of course, including the weekly wages of part timers pulls down the statistical average.



So...am I disputing that incomes have 'stagnated'?

You betcha.'

What part of that exactly is relevant to your "disputing that incomes have 'stagnated'"?
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
This brilliant quip is attributed to Benjamin Disraeli.


It is illustrative of the fact that bogus and/or misread statistics are used by the Left to persuade the populace that they are being cheated, their income stagnated, through no faults of their own, while the 'rich get richer."

Sadly....the ploy is eminently successful with the 'less than informed.'






1. The current version of the ploy is 'income inequality.'
It is as much a lie as most of the other gambits and fabrications the Left uses to mislead, and to accrue power.
The basic lie is "you should be doing a lot better...you're being cheated by the greedy 1%....we are the only ones that care about you!"

a. First of all...there is no perennial group in America known as the "1%." It is merely a snapshot of the economy at the moment: economic mobility constantly moves folks in and out of said group, and every other economic quintile.

“Of individuals who were in the lowest income quintile in 1975, 5.1 percent were still there in 1991, 14.6 percent had moved up to the second quintile, 21 percent to the middle quintile, 30.3 percent to the fourth quintile and 29 percent to the highest quintile. Of those in the highest quintile in 1975, 62.5 percent were still there in 1991, while 0.9 percent had fallen all the way to the bottom fifth.” http://www.dallasfed.org/fed/annual/1999p/ar95.pdf


b. And...to disabuse oneself of any idea that the Left cares about anyone....simply look at the party that has led the 10 worst performing cities for half a century, and the truth is staring you in the face.
. DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP!

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn’t elected
a Republican mayor since 1961;

Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn’t elected one since 1954;

Cincinnati, OH (3rd)… since 1984;

Cleveland, OH (4th)… since 1989;

Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican Mayor;

St. Louis, MO (6th)…. since 1949;

El Paso, TX (7th) has never had a Republican Mayor;

Milwaukee, WI (8th)… since 1908;

Philadelphia, PA (9th)… since 1952;

Newark, NJ (10th)… since 1907.
Top 10 Poorest Cities run by Democrats « Scattershooting





2. Now, how about 'economic stagnation'...the idea that there has been little or no growth in the wealth of the average citizen.

a. “In the 25 years from 1980 to 2004, a period during which U.S. gross domestic product per person grew by almost two-thirds, the wages of the typical worker actually fell slightly after accounting for inflation.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101051.html

b. Here is where that Disraeli quote comes in. The statistics that claim the above fail to include the value of benefits such as health insurance and retirement benefits, etc., which have represented a growing share of compensation over the years.
See Cox and Alm, “The Myths of Rich and Poor,” p.21


c. The w2 is not what you get in compensation.....the benefits represent about 30% in addition to salary.
If 30% Of Pay Is Benefits, What About Independent Contractors? - Forbes


d. And....the hidden increases:
The stock market boom of the ‘90’s caused IRA and 401(k) plans to triple: http://federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/Current/annuals/a1995-2004.pdf

Yet while the largest part of the gain went to the bottom 99% of income earners, none was reported on income tax returns, and therefore none of it showed up in income distribution studies based on income tax return data.

But the greatest part of the capital gains of the rich were outside such accounts and thus were reported on returns. This exaggerated and misidentified changes in income distribution.

Capital gains tax rate cuts in ’97 and in 2003 caused a surge in reportable capital gains realizations outside of tax-protected retirement accounts. The sharp cut in the rate on dividends in 2003 caused a similar surge in dividends paid and reported. These changes caused distortions in comparing trends in incomes for top income earners versus others.


e. Nor do these sophists separated full time workers from part time (part time work has been growing, another indicator of rising prosperity). Of course, including the weekly wages of part timers pulls down the statistical average.



So...am I disputing that incomes have 'stagnated'?

You betcha.'

What part of that exactly is relevant to your "disputing that incomes have 'stagnated'"?




Thank you for your service to the country.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Thank you for your service to the country.
Oh PC, you can be so abrasive at times. :frown:

OK....since you got my drift....here's more:



3. There is the allegation that there has been little or no improvement or even a decline in the standard of living or wages or compensation of all but the top earners since 1970 or 1973. This, based on a misreading the data of the Bureau of Labor Statistics “average earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers.” This stat is not a measure of the wages of “blue collar workers,” as “nonsupervisory workers” includes physicians, lawyers, accountants, nurses, social workers, research aides, teachers, drafters, photographers, beauticians and musicians.
Sowell, "Fact & Fallacies," chapter five


a. Further, average earnings reported have been heavily diluted over the years by the rise of millions of part-time employment by spouses, mothers, students, seniors, and others. Over the last 40 years, more and more have taken part-time jobs…this, in itself indicates a rise in the standard of living of Americans…but their averaging in their earnings appears to bring down the earnings of full-time workers.”… the rapid increase in part time workers is pretty stunning.”
Calculated Risk: Over 8 Million Part Time Workers

Note....it says 'over the years.' Let's remember that the current President has been incompetent in assuaging the economic problems to the extent that many who what full time jobs cannot find same.


b. Meanwhile real G.D.P. has increased from $3.771 trillion in 1970 to $9.817 trillion in 2000.
Average real consumption per person has increased 66% between 1970 and 1996. Poverty and Wage Stagnation in the U.S.? | Discourse




4. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation.
Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.


a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.”
Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

Get it? 'Wage stagnation' is a lie.




5. One more metric that shows same:
The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...ce=N&AllYearsChk=YES&Update=Update&JavaBox=no
Update:
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...1&910=x&911=0&903=264&904=1973&905=2004&906=q

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.



All of which would be well-know if the Left did not control the schools and the media....and if the public hadn't become (research) lazy.
 

RandomVariable

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
5,103
Reaction score
359
Points
85
Thank you for your service to the country.
Oh PC, you can be so abrasive at times. :frown:

OK....since you got my drift....here's more:



3. There is the allegation that there has been little or no improvement or even a decline in the standard of living or wages or compensation of all but the top earners since 1970 or 1973. This, based on a misreading the data of the Bureau of Labor Statistics “average earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers.” This stat is not a measure of the wages of “blue collar workers,” as “nonsupervisory workers” includes physicians, lawyers, accountants, nurses, social workers, research aides, teachers, drafters, photographers, beauticians and musicians.
Sowell, "Fact & Fallacies," chapter five


a. Further, average earnings reported have been heavily diluted over the years by the rise of millions of part-time employment by spouses, mothers, students, seniors, and others. Over the last 40 years, more and more have taken part-time jobs…this, in itself indicates a rise in the standard of living of Americans…but their averaging in their earnings appears to bring down the earnings of full-time workers.”… the rapid increase in part time workers is pretty stunning.”
Calculated Risk: Over 8 Million Part Time Workers

Note....it says 'over the years.' Let's remember that the current President has been incompetent in assuaging the economic problems to the extent that many who what full time jobs cannot find same.


b. Meanwhile real G.D.P. has increased from $3.771 trillion in 1970 to $9.817 trillion in 2000.
Average real consumption per person has increased 66% between 1970 and 1996. Poverty and Wage Stagnation in the U.S.? | Discourse




4. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation.
Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.


a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.”
Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

Get it? 'Wage stagnation' is a lie.




5. One more metric that shows same:
The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...ce=N&AllYearsChk=YES&Update=Update&JavaBox=no
Update:
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...1&910=x&911=0&903=264&904=1973&905=2004&906=q

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.



All of which would be well-know if the Left did not control the schools and the media....and if the public hadn't become (research) lazy.
From the bea.gov link which table(s) are you referring to?
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Oh PC, you can be so abrasive at times. :frown:

OK....since you got my drift....here's more:



3. There is the allegation that there has been little or no improvement or even a decline in the standard of living or wages or compensation of all but the top earners since 1970 or 1973. This, based on a misreading the data of the Bureau of Labor Statistics “average earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers.” This stat is not a measure of the wages of “blue collar workers,” as “nonsupervisory workers” includes physicians, lawyers, accountants, nurses, social workers, research aides, teachers, drafters, photographers, beauticians and musicians.
Sowell, "Fact & Fallacies," chapter five


a. Further, average earnings reported have been heavily diluted over the years by the rise of millions of part-time employment by spouses, mothers, students, seniors, and others. Over the last 40 years, more and more have taken part-time jobs…this, in itself indicates a rise in the standard of living of Americans…but their averaging in their earnings appears to bring down the earnings of full-time workers.”… the rapid increase in part time workers is pretty stunning.”
Calculated Risk: Over 8 Million Part Time Workers

Note....it says 'over the years.' Let's remember that the current President has been incompetent in assuaging the economic problems to the extent that many who what full time jobs cannot find same.


b. Meanwhile real G.D.P. has increased from $3.771 trillion in 1970 to $9.817 trillion in 2000.
Average real consumption per person has increased 66% between 1970 and 1996. Poverty and Wage Stagnation in the U.S.? | Discourse




4. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation.
Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.


a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.”
Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

Get it? 'Wage stagnation' is a lie.




5. One more metric that shows same:
The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...ce=N&AllYearsChk=YES&Update=Update&JavaBox=no
Update:
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...1&910=x&911=0&903=264&904=1973&905=2004&906=q

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.



All of which would be well-know if the Left did not control the schools and the media....and if the public hadn't become (research) lazy.
From the bea.gov link which table(s) are you referring to?




Table 7 -> 7.1....and change range to 1973-2004 using 'Options'


Or....don't doubt me.
 
Last edited:
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
What part of that exactly is relevant to your "disputing that incomes have 'stagnated'"?
Do what I do, and read her posts backwards. They're a lot easier to follow. :D


Well you can't.....'cause I haven't finished demolishing the Liberal lies yet!

Here's more:


6. OK....but what about after 2004??? What happened?
What happened was Democrat policies that involved government involving in the private economy- housing- came home to roost: the Mortgage Meltdown.

And, an incompetent President made things worse:

"... the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession." Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession | The Weekly Standard


So, can't find a way to blame Republicans....who ya' gonna blame?

Don't blame it on the sunshine
Don't blame it on the moonlight
Don't blame it on the good times
Blame it on the boogie

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkBS4zUjJZo]Blame It On The Boogie (Michael Jackson's Vision) - YouTube[/ame]



7 . OK....one more thing about this bogus 'stagnation.'

Income is only significant as it relates to one's standard of living. And, as usual, and specifically during the period in question....things have only gotten better!
An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.
People are buying more and living better.



8. Example:

In 1949, someone who worked minimum wage over the summer would have enough money to buy the following items from that year’s Sears’ catalogue:
A Smith-Corona typewriter, Argus 21 35mm camera, Silvertone AM-FM table radio, and Silvertone 3-speed phonograph.


In 2009, the same person, working the same number of hours at minimum wage, would now be able to purchase:

A Dell laptop computer, HP color ink printer, scanner, copier, Canon 8 megapixel digital camera, GPS system, 32” LCD HDTV television, 8GB iPod Nano, GE microwave, Haier refrigerator/freezer, Toshiba DVD/VCR combo, RCA home theater system, Uniden cordless phone, RCA AM/FM radio, Camcorder, Sony PlayStation 2, as well as several other things.
Mark J. Perry, “Young Americans: Luckiest Generation in History,” CARPE DIEM: Young Americans: Luckiest Generation in History



So.....'wage or economic statnation'?????

Phoooey!
 

RandomVariable

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
5,103
Reaction score
359
Points
85
OK....since you got my drift....here's more:



3. There is the allegation that there has been little or no improvement or even a decline in the standard of living or wages or compensation of all but the top earners since 1970 or 1973. This, based on a misreading the data of the Bureau of Labor Statistics “average earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers.” This stat is not a measure of the wages of “blue collar workers,” as “nonsupervisory workers” includes physicians, lawyers, accountants, nurses, social workers, research aides, teachers, drafters, photographers, beauticians and musicians.
Sowell, "Fact & Fallacies," chapter five


a. Further, average earnings reported have been heavily diluted over the years by the rise of millions of part-time employment by spouses, mothers, students, seniors, and others. Over the last 40 years, more and more have taken part-time jobs…this, in itself indicates a rise in the standard of living of Americans…but their averaging in their earnings appears to bring down the earnings of full-time workers.”… the rapid increase in part time workers is pretty stunning.”
Calculated Risk: Over 8 Million Part Time Workers

Note....it says 'over the years.' Let's remember that the current President has been incompetent in assuaging the economic problems to the extent that many who what full time jobs cannot find same.


b. Meanwhile real G.D.P. has increased from $3.771 trillion in 1970 to $9.817 trillion in 2000.
Average real consumption per person has increased 66% between 1970 and 1996. Poverty and Wage Stagnation in the U.S.? | Discourse




4. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation.
Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.


a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.”
Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

Get it? 'Wage stagnation' is a lie.




5. One more metric that shows same:
The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...ce=N&AllYearsChk=YES&Update=Update&JavaBox=no
Update:
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...1&910=x&911=0&903=264&904=1973&905=2004&906=q

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.



All of which would be well-know if the Left did not control the schools and the media....and if the public hadn't become (research) lazy.
From the bea.gov link which table(s) are you referring to?




Table 7 -> 7.1....and change range to 1973-2004 using 'Options'


Or....don't doubt me.
Oh please. Don't think I doubt you, PC. I know your wrong. ;)

From your referenced table Table 7 -> 7.1 Selected Per Capita Product and Income Series, lines 10 through 17 which are values adjusted to 2009 dollars.

HTML:
                                                         1973        2004
10	Gross domestic product	                 25449	 47387
11	Gross national product	                 25689	47663
12	Disposable personal income	         18585	34592
13	Personal consumption expenditures	 15885	31714
14	  Goods	                                  5210	10530
15	     Durable goods	                            986       	3450
16	     Nondurable goods	                   4713	7091
17	Services	                                10392	21184
As you will notice several values doubled in that time period. Disposable personal income did not however. It went up only 1.86 times. My comprehension does not expand far enough to understand the significance of it but Durable goods went up 3.5 times and Nondurable goods went up 1.5 time.

The other aspect to look at here is that the values are per capita which means it is no indication of whether or not the income gap is growing. There are other statistics for that. Another consideration is if more people have moved out of rural areas and into urban areas then they are now spending more but that does not mean everyone in subburbia is not hurting more.

I think after all this work you owe me a cup of coffee. Buy one for Sallow too. ;)
 

Toro

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
79,515
Reaction score
17,338
Points
2,180
Location
Surfing the Oceans of Liquidity
Real incomes have been stagnant since 2000.

the report releases Sentier Research’s new index number called the Household Income Index (HII) to track monthly changes in real median annual household income over time. Using January 2000 as the starting point, with the HII set equal to 100.0, the value of the index in each subsequent month shows household income measured as a percentage of the January 2000 base value. Highlights include the following:

- The most recent value for the index was 89.4 for June 2011, down from the January 2000 base of 100.0 (the lowest value for the index was 89.3 registered in May 2011).

- Looking back to January 2000, the HII has risen above 100.0 in only nine of the 138
months covered by the series so far. The highest index value was 100.8 occurring in February 2002. With a few exceptions, the HII has declined each month since December
2008. (See the enclosed chart showing the HII and the unemployment rate.)
http://www.sentierresearch.com/pressreleases/SentierResearch_PressRelease_October_10_2011.pdf
 

Attachments

expat_panama

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
2,948
Reaction score
356
Points
130
Real incomes have been stagnant since 2000...
That's what we're hearing from the devote believers down at the Doomferall Church, and at the other end of town some also look at the original numbers over more years and then add real disp. pers. inc per capita--
+--a
--and begin to notice that there's more to it than simple dogma.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
From the bea.gov link which table(s) are you referring to?




Table 7 -> 7.1....and change range to 1973-2004 using 'Options'


Or....don't doubt me.
Oh please. Don't think I doubt you, PC. I know your wrong. ;)

From your referenced table Table 7 -> 7.1 Selected Per Capita Product and Income Series, lines 10 through 17 which are values adjusted to 2009 dollars.

HTML:
                                                         1973        2004
10	Gross domestic product	                 25449	 47387
11	Gross national product	                 25689	47663
12	Disposable personal income	         18585	34592
13	Personal consumption expenditures	 15885	31714
14	  Goods	                                  5210	10530
15	     Durable goods	                            986       	3450
16	     Nondurable goods	                   4713	7091
17	Services	                                10392	21184
As you will notice several values doubled in that time period. Disposable personal income did not however. It went up only 1.86 times. My comprehension does not expand far enough to understand the significance of it but Durable goods went up 3.5 times and Nondurable goods went up 1.5 time.

The other aspect to look at here is that the values are per capita which means it is no indication of whether or not the income gap is growing. There are other statistics for that. Another consideration is if more people have moved out of rural areas and into urban areas then they are now spending more but that does not mean everyone in subburbia is not hurting more.

I think after all this work you owe me a cup of coffee. Buy one for Sallow too. ;)





I'm never wrong.....I thought I was once, but I was mistaken.


".... real per capita consumption...."
"A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled."




Personal consumption expenditures 15885 31714
More than doubled!!!
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Prior to the late-Bush recession.....made far worse by the incompetent in the White House,....Americans were blessed with economic mobility, higher standards of living....and above all, opportunity.

No one should believe the doom-sayers, the Liberal/Progressive/Democrats whose very existence is based on convincing all that folks don't have a chance without the Left.


9. And how about this from Roger Cohen, in the NYTimes:

“I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.

You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04iht-edcohen.2.20587034.html




10. From Pew Research, March, 2009

Q.15 Generally, do you think people are better off in a free market economy, even though there may be severe ups and downs from time to time, or don’t you think so?

70 Yes, think so
20 No, don’t think so
10 Don't know/Refused (VOL.)
100
http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/498.pdf



But, Democrats......

Sixty percent (60%) of U.S. adults nationwide say that capitalism is better than socialism. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 18% disagree, while 21% are not sure.

Adults under 30 are closely divided on the question.

While Republicans and unaffiliated voters overwhelmingly say that capitalism is better, just 43% of Democrats agree. Twenty-four percent (24%) of Democrats say socialism is better.
60% Say Capitalism Better Than Socialism - Rasmussen Reports?



And the longer the schools and media remain in the hands of the enemy....the higher the percentages of those who beleve in Big Government socialism will grow.


Say good-bye to the noble experiment.
 

RandomVariable

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
5,103
Reaction score
359
Points
85
I'm never wrong.....I thought I was once, but I was mistaken.
Your sense of humor has increased immensely, and I have grown much more jaded, since we spared last. If you don't remember me by now I will be deeply offended.

Yes, the immigrant how comes to this country and works hard, works those 70-80 weeks can become the king of Wall Street. Try it with a wife. Add a kid or two. Trying adding those 80 hours now, with your head full of concerns for others and the tests and trials of everyday life. An American who completes four years at a state college, gets married, and has a kid or two, their life is over. The only thing left is the grind of middle-class existence where the little becomes less. Better yet let's look at some kid in poverty, street smart and out of the mainstream. Making it through high school and perhaps a couple years of community college. You think they are lazy or maybe they just have a realistic view of this country. No one wants them around, no loitering on this side of the street. Where one starts is where one ends unless one wants to go it alone. I like smilies. :)

 

RandomVariable

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
5,103
Reaction score
359
Points
85
Prior to the late-Bush recession.....made far worse by the incompetent in the White House,....Americans were blessed with economic mobility, higher standards of living....and above all, opportunity.

No one should believe the doom-sayers, the Liberal/Progressive/Democrats whose very existence is based on convincing all that folks don't have a chance without the Left.


9. And how about this from Roger Cohen, in the NYTimes:

“I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.

You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04iht-edcohen.2.20587034.html




10. From Pew Research, March, 2009

Q.15 Generally, do you think people are better off in a free market economy, even though there may be severe ups and downs from time to time, or don’t you think so?

70 Yes, think so
20 No, don’t think so
10 Don't know/Refused (VOL.)
100
http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/498.pdf



But, Democrats......

Sixty percent (60%) of U.S. adults nationwide say that capitalism is better than socialism. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 18% disagree, while 21% are not sure.

Adults under 30 are closely divided on the question.

While Republicans and unaffiliated voters overwhelmingly say that capitalism is better, just 43% of Democrats agree. Twenty-four percent (24%) of Democrats say socialism is better.
60% Say Capitalism Better Than Socialism - Rasmussen Reports?



And the longer the schools and media remain in the hands of the enemy....the higher the percentages of those who beleve in Big Government socialism will grow.


Say good-bye to the noble experiment.
It is a false question.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
I'm never wrong.....I thought I was once, but I was mistaken.
Your sense of humor has increased immensely, and I have grown much more jaded, since we spared last. If you don't remember me by now I will be deeply offended.

Yes, the immigrant how comes to this country and works hard, works those 70-80 weeks can become the king of Wall Street. Try it with a wife. Add a kid or two. Trying adding those 80 hours now, with your head full of concerns for others and the tests and trials of everyday life. An American who completes four years at a state college, gets married, and has a kid or two, their life is over. The only thing left is the grind of middle-class existence where the little becomes less. Better yet let's look at some kid in poverty, street smart and out of the mainstream. Making it through high school and perhaps a couple years of community college. You think they are lazy or maybe they just have a realistic view of this country. No one wants them around, no loitering on this side of the street. Where one starts is where one ends unless one wants to go it alone. I like smilies. :)




So…how long have you been living in your van?



1. "Yes, the immigrant how comes to this country and works hard, works ....."

I lived that experience.


2. "Try it with blah, blah, blah....."

These phony roadblocks are proven false by the facts of economic mobility.....
This...from Star Parker's book, "Uncle Sam's Plantation":

"The only other black in the department was a 32-year-old female who had been there 15 years. On my first day at work she was eager to give me the scoop, including how to get away with the least amount of work for the maximum financial benefit- by paying $260 to join the labor union. Every day she would say I was "uppity" because I worked fast and actually enjoyed it! The more I fulfilled my tasks with vigor, the more dislike I engendered from the union workers.

But my determination never wavered. I refused to go back on welfare or listen to the leftist lies that sought to discourage me from even trying! I used my talkng/selling experience to cohosting a talk show on a small Christian radio station in Long Beach. It didn't quite pay minimum wage, and had no benefits....so I made money based on commissions from advertisers of the show. So, no guarantees.....but hard work and a positive attitude paid off: soon, I was offered the opportunity to host my own three-hour daily radio talk show with and ABC affiliate in San Francisco. Not only a good salary, but they put a studio in my home!"

Nice, huh? This is America.



Nothing new here.....the same works and worked for everyone.
Need more?

"John Calvin’s and Martin Luther’s emphasis on individual responsibility, hard work, thrift, providence, honesty, and deferred gratification at its center—shaped the spirit of capitalism and helped it succeed…religions chiefly of the middle and working classes, and the virtues they promoted led to a new kind of affluence and upward mobility, based not on land (which was largely owned by the aristocracy) but on productive enterprises. The bourgeois values had helped to sustain Weber’s “rational tempering” of the impulse to accumulate wealth: they helped put the rationality in “rational self-interest,” or, as Tocqueville put it, “self-interest rightly understood.”
Whatever Happened to the Work Ethic? by Steven Malanga, City Journal Summer 2009




It's all about values....that's more of a sure thing than freshly fried fox in a forest fire.




3. "Where one starts is where one ends unless one wants to go it alone."

You couldn't be more wrong...you could try, but you wouldn't be successful.

And....you must be a real pleasure to be around.
Do you come equipped with razor blades?





The Left constantly speaks of how "unfair" this or that fact of life is.....

The only "unfair" thing is that you were born in this great nation.....some of us had to strive to get here.

Contrary to popular belief, nobody owes you anything.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
98,781
Reaction score
32,624
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Prior to the late-Bush recession.....made far worse by the incompetent in the White House,....Americans were blessed with economic mobility, higher standards of living....and above all, opportunity.

No one should believe the doom-sayers, the Liberal/Progressive/Democrats whose very existence is based on convincing all that folks don't have a chance without the Left.


9. And how about this from Roger Cohen, in the NYTimes:

“I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.

You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04iht-edcohen.2.20587034.html




10. From Pew Research, March, 2009

Q.15 Generally, do you think people are better off in a free market economy, even though there may be severe ups and downs from time to time, or don’t you think so?

70 Yes, think so
20 No, don’t think so
10 Don't know/Refused (VOL.)
100
http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/498.pdf



But, Democrats......

Sixty percent (60%) of U.S. adults nationwide say that capitalism is better than socialism. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 18% disagree, while 21% are not sure.

Adults under 30 are closely divided on the question.

While Republicans and unaffiliated voters overwhelmingly say that capitalism is better, just 43% of Democrats agree. Twenty-four percent (24%) of Democrats say socialism is better.
60% Say Capitalism Better Than Socialism - Rasmussen Reports?



And the longer the schools and media remain in the hands of the enemy....the higher the percentages of those who beleve in Big Government socialism will grow.


Say good-bye to the noble experiment.
It is a false question.



I see you motto is ‘I never finish anythi”

What is 'a false question'?
I'm beginning to see the problem: work on being articulate.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top