Jump to content

A comparison of us yearly earnings over 6 decades by age and sex


Recommended Posts

https://bfi.uchicago.edu/insight/research-summary/lifetime-earnings-in-the-united-states-over-six-decades/

lede: The stagnation of average earnings and rising income inequality in the United States since the 1970s has not only motivated economic research but has also informed discussions about political shifts among various demographics, as well as inspired policy debates about how to address this long-run phenomenon. This is especially true when it comes to the fate of male workers.

The above reflects my understanding - that beginning about 1972 we had more workers than jobs. While fluctuating, that gap has been widening since. One US response is to omit the majority of the unemployed from official figures (4% unemployment = 24% of 16-64 not working).

The synopsis at the end: By focusing on lifetime earnings for US workers over the last six decades, this research makes important contributions to the ongoing debate about stagnating median earnings and income inequality. In particular, the authors reveal that most men who entered the US labor market since the late 1960s have seen little-to-no gains in lifetime earnings relative to earlier cohorts, despite that the US economy has grown significantly during the same period.

Further, much of this stagnation for men can be traced to the conditions during the labor market entry of a particular age cohort: newer cohorts of men faced declining or stagnant median initial earnings relative to previous cohorts and did not experience faster earnings growth over their lifecycle to make up for the lower entry earnings. Women, on the other hand, experienced a sustained increase in median lifetime earnings from one cohort to the next, but starting from very low levels.

The authors also reveal that since 1970, inequality in lifetime earnings increased significantly within each gender but remained virtually flat in the combined population, thanks largely to the closing lifetime gender gap. Significantly, the authors’ analysis of partial lifecycle data from more recent cohorts suggests that both the stagnation of median lifetime earnings and the rise in inequality is likely to continue.

For policymakers, these findings shine a harsh light on the challenges facing many workers entering the US workforce. For example, the authors show that newer cohorts of workers were already different from older ones by age 25. Once in the labor market, the earnings distribution for these newer cohorts evolved similarly to those of older cohorts. Further, the authors’ findings suggest that the sources of the dramatic changes in the US earnings distribution over the last 50 years may be found in the experiences of newer cohorts during their youth (and possibly earlier). Many workers are starting behind, in other words, and finishing further behind.

Link to comment

Who are these "policymakers" ?  Are they the fount of ALL wisdom?  Why do they get to dictate what should occur in the marketplace?

Are there predators in segments of society?  Sure!  But do not blame it on capitalism.  Why does it happen?  Most likely due to cronyism between cheaters and government bureaucrats and "representatives" (scratching each other's backs).

Is our economy a zero sum game?  No!  Is the economic pie a fixed size?  Of course not.  Do the contents of the pie change change over time?  Most certaintly.  Free enterprise is a dynamic engine that encourages greater efficiencies and stunning innovations.  Government would not have predicted or planned for the development of appliances in the 50s, computers in the 60s, electronics in the 70s, PC in the 80s, cell phones in the 90s, and on and on.  Sometimes creative destruction has to occur (the horse buggy get phased out by the automobile).

The USSR lost the space race to land men on the moon during the 60s.  One reason could be due to Russians looking down their noses at the use of computers.  Both the US and USSR had great mathematicians on their staff.  But the US was able to miniaturize their electronics including computers and eventually pull ahead.

Insistence on forcing businesses to pay minimum wages?  The law of unintended consequences comes into play.  It is a crime against young people who really need to find an entry point, acquire meaningful experiences, gain traction in becoming self-reliant, and be well on the way to competing for greater opportunities.  I read somewhere that people go thru an average of five career changes in their lifetimes.  There are many people who do appreciate being able to do temp work while they are networking between job changes.  I have done that.

Government findings shine a harsh light on the challenges facing "many" workers . . . ?  That could be code for giving more power to bigger government to control the lives of the people.  There many things done that were harmful to the family, to industries, to the health of various constituencies.  Be wary of the social engineers.  Try to see the big picture, avoid the shortsightedness of bureaucrats, and always safeguard the right to freely choose.  Government love dealing with "scarcities" because they can impose regulations and rationing.  Frequently they create scarcities purposely.  Such as denying permits for building new reservoirs, power plants, grooming/cultivating forests, and so on.  Thus they impose greater fees and taxes on resulting water shortages, brownouts of electric grids, needless severe forest fires due to growth of underbrush and excess dead trees.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, longview said:

Who are these "policymakers" ?

Typically elected officials.

13 minutes ago, longview said:

Are they the fount of ALL wisdom?

Perhaps to voters who share their party. Beyond those folks, it seems unlikely anyone would think that.

15 minutes ago, longview said:

Why do they get to dictate what should occur in the marketplace?

They were reelected after granting themselves that power.

16 minutes ago, longview said:

Are there predators in segments of society?

You have many questions.

17 minutes ago, longview said:

Sure!

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Chum said:

Typically elected officials.

Perhaps to voters who share their party. Beyond those folks, it seems unlikely anyone would think that.

They were reelected after granting themselves that power.

You have many questions.

 

Sadly you choose to evade the essentials of concerns outlined.  The biggest power among the "policymakers" are entrenched deep in the bowels of the bureaucracy.   Some actually have more power than most the senators and congressional reps.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)

Yes, and that stagnation has come despite vast increases in U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) during that entire period, and a long-term Bull Market.

At the same time, "Testosterone levels show steady decrease among young US men."

Quote

...potential causes for these declines could be increased obesity/BMI, assay variations, diet/phytoestrogens, declined exercise and physical activity, fat percentage, marijuana use, and environmental toxins.

“We’ve seen that lower values of testosterone have been associated with increased comorbidities and an increase risk for all-cause mortality. This decline specifically, in these young adult men, with increased obesity may lead to an increase in precocious cancer,” Lokeshwar said, adding such decreases can also result in a lower libido and an increased risk for erectile dysfunction.

“This is especially worrisome in this young adult age group, as many men feel stigma and are less likely to seek care for these low libido and erectile dysfunction.” Lokeshwar added. “Testosterone levels in AYA men are used as the benchmark normal levels for testosterone. This is very scary, because generally, when we think of normal values of testosterone, we treat based upon this age group. This may ultimately lead to the undertreatment of testosterone deficiency, which can have large ramifications and severe consequences.”  https://www.urologytimes.com/view/testosterone-levels-show-steady-decrease-among-young-us-men

And men are rapidly disappearing from college campuses:

Quote

Where men once went to college in proportions far higher than women—58 percent to 42 percent as recently as the 1970s—the ratio has now almost exactly reversed.

This fall [2017], women will comprise more than 56 percent of students on campuses nationwide, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Some 2.2 million fewer men than women will be enrolled in college this year [2017]. And the trend shows no sign of abating. By 2026, the department estimates, 57 percent of college students will be women.  https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/08/why-men-are-the-new-college-minority/536103/

 

Quote

While enrollment in higher education overall fell 2.5 percent in the fall [2020], or by more than 461,000 students compared to the fall of 2019, the decline among men was more than seven times as steep as the decline among women, according to an analysis of figures from the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.  https://hechingerreport.org/the-pandemic-is-speeding-up-the-mass-disappearance-of-men-from-college/

Edited by Robert F. Smith
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, longview said:

But do not blame it on capitalism.

Like every economic system, capitalism comes with deep flaws. Some of those can be mitigated thru strong, effective regulation.

22 minutes ago, longview said:

Why does it happen?  Most likely due to cronyism between cheaters and government bureaucrats and "representatives" (scratching each other's backs).

This seems reasonable.

22 minutes ago, longview said:

Is our economy a zero sum game?

Not strictly but the ability to for the powerful to mine the vulnerable is absolutely baked-in. That's not just an economics thing tho.

26 minutes ago, longview said:

No!

You're just being petulant.

27 minutes ago, longview said:

Is the economic pie a fixed size?  Of course not.  Do the contents of the pie change change over time?  Most certaintly.

Nor is it boundless and endless. Absolutes aren't a terrific fit for an economics discussion. I recommend not introducing them - not even if it provides a convenient straw-man to knock down.

34 minutes ago, longview said:

Free enterprise is a dynamic engine that encourages greater efficiencies and stunning innovations. 

Among many things that happen, this is one.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, longview said:

..................................

Are there predators in segments of society?  Sure!  But do not blame it on capitalism.  Why does it happen?  Most likely due to cronyism between cheaters and government bureaucrats and "representatives" (scratching each other's backs).

Is our economy a zero sum game?  No!  ............................

Of course the predators are in charge.  They always have been.  And our economy is in fact a zero sum game, except for the elites -- who buy elections and thus control legislation.  Whenever a large business runs into trouble, it receives a public bailout through the use of taxpayer money (socialism for the rich).  The economy has long been stagnant for the little guy precisely because that means greater profits for the elites (who write the tax laws).  Jesus had something to say about rich folk, even though He is usually carefully ignored.  The oligarchs run Russia, just as they run the USA.  That is nothing new, nor will it change soon.  Come Lord Jesus.

The myth of the freemarket is that it ignores the lack of transparency.

Edited by Robert F. Smith
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, longview said:

Sadly you choose to evade the essentials of concerns outlined. 

I directly answered your questions. After that I answered some more. I might keep doing that.

23 minutes ago, longview said:

The biggest power among the "policymakers" are entrenched deep in the bowels of the bureaucracy.   Some actually have more power than most the senators and congressional reps.

No argument from me. Voters of both parties are strongly committed to reelecting officials who enable this.

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, longview said:

Government would not have predicted or planned for the development of appliances in the 50s, computers in the 60s, electronics in the 70s, PC in the 80s, cell phones in the 90s, and on and on. 

I know zero people who ever expected this from government.

50 minutes ago, longview said:

Sometimes creative destruction has to occur (the horse buggy get phased out by the automobile).

Sure. But the legacy players spend billions to prevent this from happening (energy and IP come to mind). They have deep support from pols - and together, they ceaselessly condition the electorate to follow suit.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Chum said:
1 hour ago, longview said:

Government would not have predicted or planned for the development of appliances in the 50s, computers in the 60s, electronics in the 70s, PC in the 80s, cell phones in the 90s, and on and on. 

I know zero people who ever expected this from government.

I know TOO many people that want bigger government to control more completely the lives of the people, especially the common people.

Link to comment
56 minutes ago, longview said:

The USSR lost the space race to land men on the moon during the 60s. 

They also pretty solidly kicked our butt in every other space way. Our only pics from Venus' surface were from the USSR. They took more risks than we did and nailed more firsts than we did.

My conclusion is both the US and USSR had good approaches that each paid unique dividends. I find it efficient that both methods were widely used.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, longview said:

Is our economy a zero sum game? 

You know what is a zero sum game? Single Economy Ideologies. The assumption that one pure economy type is the best possible fit, is never serially harmful.

I suspect the Church has solid reasons for embracing an internal economy that looks a whole lot more like socialism than capitalism. That that economy intersects excellently with capitalism kind of hints that single-sided economic arguments are dumb.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, longview said:

I know TOO many people that want bigger government to control more completely the lives of the people, especially the common people.

This has nothing to do with my point which was a response to an odd thing about a Gov dept of predictions or something.

or

That's usually almost everyone. The difference is which parts of the government they want to bigger and yield more control to.

You can choose which response works better for you.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, longview said:

Insistence on forcing businesses to pay minimum wages?  The law of unintended consequences comes into play

Sure. We've had a minimum wage for 80 years. Within it we've had terrific and awful economies. None of the predicted utopias or dystopias materialized, however.

I think it'd be reasonable to argue that it's a band-aid for larger issues but band-aids are useful for what they do.

However, while Larger Issues fund campaigns, band-aids might be the best we can do.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

"Testosterone levels show steady decrease among young US men."

We were once looking at plastics as a cause of this. Not sure what came of that.

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

And men are rapidly disappearing from college campuses:

Big ticket colleges have had an increasingly poor return on investment. Perhaps that predominantly effects men. I've seen nothing one way or the other.

As far as middle/high schools are heavily geared toward prepping for 4+ year universities, I feel they are poorly serving kids (excepting the minority that can afford 4+ year colleges). We'd be better served with HS grads with employable skills*.

* ignoring that hiring algorithms compulsively black-ball first time job applicants

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Chum said:

We were once looking at plastics as a cause of this. Not sure what came of that.

Big ticket colleges have had an increasingly poor return on investment. Perhaps that predominantly effects men. I've seen nothing one way or the other.

As far as middle/high schools are heavily geared toward prepping for 4+ year universities, I feel they are poorly serving kids (excepting the minority that can afford 4+ year colleges). We'd be better served with HS grads with employable skills*.

* ignoring that hiring algorithms compulsively black-ball first time job applicants

Yes.  In Germany, for example, they funnel many young men into technical schools already at the high school level.  That means good jobs at good pay.

Link to comment
Just now, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes.  In Germany, for example, they funnel many young men into technical schools already at the high school level.  That means good jobs at good pay.

Big fan of those. Son #4 graduated from a tech college this week. He completed most of it while in HS.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes.  In Germany, for example, they funnel many young men into technical schools already at the high school level.  That means good jobs at good pay.

Personally I think Christian Democracy and the Rhineland model are almost the cat's meow.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes.  In Germany, for example, they funnel many young men into technical schools already at the high school level.  That means good jobs at good pay.

More I see you post more I realize you and I may well agree on more than I originally thought, you're cool.  Seen this?

Rerum novarum - Wikipedia

6 hours ago, Chum said:

Sure. We've had a minimum wage for 80 years. Within it we've had terrific and awful economies. None of the predicted utopias or dystopias materialized, however.

I think it'd be reasonable to argue that it's a band-aid for larger issues but band-aids are useful for what they do.

However, while Larger Issues fund campaigns, band-aids might be the best we can do.

 

6 hours ago, Chum said:

We were once looking at plastics as a cause of this. Not sure what came of that.

Big ticket colleges have had an increasingly poor return on investment. Perhaps that predominantly effects men. I've seen nothing one way or the other.

As far as middle/high schools are heavily geared toward prepping for 4+ year universities, I feel they are poorly serving kids (excepting the minority that can afford 4+ year colleges). We'd be better served with HS grads with employable skills*.

* ignoring that hiring algorithms compulsively black-ball first time job applicants

Will be real interesting to see how student loan debt plays out, most will likely never repay it.  When you owe someone millions, you have a problem.  When it's billions, they have a problem.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, poptart said:

More I see you post more I realize you and I may well agree on more than I originally thought, you're cool.  Seen this?

Rerum novarum - Wikipedia

The  only problem I have with well-intentioned commentary on govt is that it inevitably makes govt the "other," rather than a tool owned by the governed.  The worker is a victim at the mercy of his boss or the system.  That is often true worldwide, but the American experiment was supposed to be somewhat different.  What is true is that the worker is his own nemesis. Or, as Walt Kelly put it in the mouth of Pogo Possum:  "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

1 hour ago, poptart said:

Will be real interesting to see how student loan debt plays out, most will likely never repay it.  When you owe someone millions, you have a problem.  When it's billions, they have a problem.

They do forgive student debt when you die.  It does not remain as an albatross on the estate.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Douglas Avans said:

Personally I think Christian Democracy and the Rhineland model are almost the cat's meow.

It was designed by an American Mormon by the name of Dale Clark, an officer of the allied military occupation who spoke fluent German and who was a Harvard grad.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It was designed by an American Mormon by the name of Dale Clark, an officer of the allied military occupation who spoke fluent German and who was a Harvard grad.

It appears that you are saying that Christian Democracy or the Rhineland model or both were designed by Dale Clark.  If so I'm certainly interested in you expanding upon that, Robert.  

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Douglas Avans said:

It appears that you are saying that Christian Democracy or the Rhineland model or both were designed by Dale Clark.  If so I'm certainly interested in you expanding upon that, Robert.  

The Christian Democratic Party and the Constitution of the new West Germany were designed by Clark at the Hotel Paradiso on the Isle of Capri with several German intellectuals, such as Dr Josef Müller -- who had been a prisoner in Flossenburg, Buchenwald, and Dachau.  In order to be acceptable to the Bavarian Catholics, Clark had to obtain an audience with the Pope (arranged by Dr Müller).  See Müller, Bis zur letzten Konsequenz: Ein Leben für Frieden und Freiheit (München: Suddeutscher Verlag, 1967/1975/1983).  Clark was a key member of the Allied Military Government for Occupied Territories (AMGOT), and argued vehemently against the revenge-seeking of Henry Morgenthau in searching how best to create the new Germany.

Clark was born in Farmington, Utah, in 1910, and died in 2008 (same year his wife died).  He was a recipient of the Legion of Merit, and rec'd his PhD from Harvard (where he also taught).

Us_legion_of_merit_legionnaire.png

Link to comment
23 hours ago, longview said:

Who are these "policymakers" ?  Are they the fount of ALL wisdom?  Why do they get to dictate what should occur in the marketplace?

Are there predators in segments of society?  Sure!  But do not blame it on capitalism.  Why does it happen?  Most likely due to cronyism between cheaters and government bureaucrats and "representatives" (scratching each other's backs).

Is our economy a zero sum game?  No!  Is the economic pie a fixed size?  Of course not.  Do the contents of the pie change change over time?  Most certaintly.  Free enterprise is a dynamic engine that encourages greater efficiencies and stunning innovations.  Government would not have predicted or planned for the development of appliances in the 50s, computers in the 60s, electronics in the 70s, PC in the 80s, cell phones in the 90s, and on and on.  Sometimes creative destruction has to occur (the horse buggy get phased out by the automobile).

The USSR lost the space race to land men on the moon during the 60s.  One reason could be due to Russians looking down their noses at the use of computers.  Both the US and USSR had great mathematicians on their staff.  But the US was able to miniaturize their electronics including computers and eventually pull ahead.

Insistence on forcing businesses to pay minimum wages?  The law of unintended consequences comes into play.  It is a crime against young people who really need to find an entry point, acquire meaningful experiences, gain traction in becoming self-reliant, and be well on the way to competing for greater opportunities.  I read somewhere that people go thru an average of five career changes in their lifetimes.  There are many people who do appreciate being able to do temp work while they are networking between job changes.  I have done that.

Government findings shine a harsh light on the challenges facing "many" workers . . . ?  That could be code for giving more power to bigger government to control the lives of the people.  There many things done that were harmful to the family, to industries, to the health of various constituencies.  Be wary of the social engineers.  Try to see the big picture, avoid the shortsightedness of bureaucrats, and always safeguard the right to freely choose.  Government love dealing with "scarcities" because they can impose regulations and rationing.  Frequently they create scarcities purposely.  Such as denying permits for building new reservoirs, power plants, grooming/cultivating forests, and so on.  Thus they impose greater fees and taxes on resulting water shortages, brownouts of electric grids, needless severe forest fires due to growth of underbrush and excess dead trees.

A full-time job that does not pay a living wage has no right to exist. Taking a person’s full time labor and not giving them enough to live on is fundamentally wrong. The company trying to pay such a wage should be shut out of the market to make way for a company that can pay a living wage.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...