(09-16-2010, 08:06 PM)kandrathe Wrote: I think it pits the less successful workers against the more successful workers. Where I would like people to focus is on net worth. If incomes rose 10% under Carter, who cares, because under Carter the prices of goods went up by 20 or 30%, and so the net effect was that we are worse off.
I assume this is all hypothetical? I know that it's fun to stomp all over Jimmy the Peanut, but I don't think real incomes dropped by a whole 10 or 20% during his term.
In fact, they rose, by about 5%.
Quote:In fact, I think we discussed that briefly once here before. I believe that in general for the bottom 2/3rds of Americans, their CPI adjusted purchasing power has declined over the past 20 years. Wages are not keeping up with inflation.
This is both true and disturbing. Real wages for the lowest quintiles have stagnated... almost exactly following the Reagan reforms intended to "trickle down."
Quote:Per Capita Net Worth is more interesting to me, and it shows the illusion of wealth created by continuous bubble building and popping economies.
We are not creating a dragon's hoard, nor are we in the age of mercantilism. Net worth, while important, is less important than income. The ability to produce more is what drives economies, not the quantity of stuff possessed.
-Jester