
Study: Inequality Robs $2.5T from U.S. Workers Each Year - AndrewBissell
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/09/rand-study-how-high-is-inequality-us.html
======
marcusverus
This argument strikes me as bizarre.

1) The distribution of income has been different over time. 2) If it had been
pegged at 70's levels, and wealth generation had been unaffected, incomes
would have grown more. 3) But this hypothetical didn't happen. Ergo 4) You're
being robbed by the enemies of the proletariat.

Also, the data on offer strike me as odd. There has been _far more_ than 8%
wage growth since the 70s. This Pew Trends article, which controls for factors
like household size, indicates that household income has risen 49% since
1970.[0] Note that incomes have risen significantly since 1990, even as the
number of dual income households has remained flat during that period. [1]

[0] [https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/01/09/trends-in-
income-...](https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/01/09/trends-in-income-and-
wealth-inequality/) [1] [https://www.pewresearch.org/ft_dual-income-
households-1960-2...](https://www.pewresearch.org/ft_dual-income-
households-1960-2012-2/)

~~~
skitout
"In fact, in real terms average hourly earnings peaked more than 45 years ago"

"Meanwhile, wage gains have gone largely to the highest earners."

[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-
us...](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-
real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/)

~~~
marcusverus
Your source ignores benefits.

~~~
anemoiac
The source you're referring to explicitly discusses benefits. It even includes
a chart that depicts the relationship between "wages and salaries" and "total
benefits" over the past twenty years.

While I think it's important to distinguish between wages and total earnings,
it's also important to differentiate between earnings and purchasing power.
The fact that benefits have increased over time won't mean much to the average
American if that increase simply reflects a corresponding increase in the cost
of healthcare, for example.

In my view, the important question to ask isn't whether median earnings have
been completely stagnant over recent decades (i.e. 0.00% growth in real
terms), but whether increasing inequality represents some sort of structural
change. Thinking in those terms, the range of varying estimates regarding the
change in median earnings over recent decades seems relatively small and
insignificant when compared to the larger economic picture.

------
_understood_
Another robbery is the taxable income equation and the effects on everyone in
a community. For instance, why should the infrastructure in Seattle, WA be
literally crumbling before our eyes? (I'm not saying the civic budget makers
are blameless here, but something is not right with this equation)

Also, it is not just the home of Bezos and Gates, but multiple other cities
according to this audit released by SDOT on 09/11/2020:
[http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/CityAuditor/aud...](http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/CityAuditor/auditreports/2020_03_SeattleBridges_FinalReport.pdf)

 _(Poor bridge conditions: Chicago 14%, Pittsburgh 13%, Seattle 6%,
Minneapolis 5%, DC 4%, and Portland 3%)_

~~~
elindbe2
Can you elaborate on what equation you're referring to?

~~~
klmadfejno
I think he just means the income tax brackets are not progressive enough

------
temp667
It is interesting reading the descriptions of amazon warehouses as hell holes
relative to other warehouse jobs

I'm curious if there will be room for increased automation in these abusive
manual labor areas in logistics. Warehouse work, truck driving etc. If these
could be automated, then the workers would no longer be subject to the
horrible abuse we read about. Amazon and other I could imagine leading some of
these efforts eventually.

Not sure however that moves to reduce manual labor will reduce inequality, the
person who owns the equipment that replaces 100 workers may take the profits
from that ownership.

~~~
DeonPenny
Well bezo has been pushing for increasing minimum wage for warehouse workers
for this very reason. Anyone without the capability to automate will be driven
out because they can't pay workers, and amazon will if anything become more
efficient and have no incoming competition because he legislated his only
possible one which would have been cheap labor.

------
DeonPenny
So these people want to redistribute wealth based on productivity increases
from entrepreneurs to works. Even though the productivity increases have very
little to do with the workers being more productive and more to do with
technology and automation. This is also despite though by their own admission
workers wages and living standards increased over that same time.

Seems crazy to me.

Seems like because productivity increased and ease of business has increased
more people should be creating businesses since you need less workers to run
your business. This also includes the fact by their own admission because the
rich can't just store this money most just goes into reinvestment anyway.

~~~
frankbreetz
the owners, have changed very little. If a factory becomes automated, the
owner of the factory had access to capitol, and the workers had access to
labor. I don't see why one of these should be rewarded for production
increases and the other shouldn't. You can't create a business without
capitol, therefore one might conclude the wealth inequality is keeping most
people from starting a business even if they have a good idea.

~~~
DeonPenny
The owners have change a lot. In todays world more entrepreneurs don't supply
their capital. They supply the ideas, organization, innovation, risk, and
maybe a small bit of saving but they from bezos to elon none really supply the
capital.

So a lot of things may be keep workers from trying but it isn't capital.

The workers doesn't get more of a business for the same reason you don't get a
better grade cause you peer got a better grade. The workers didn't supply more
labor, but the owner supplied more ideas, better organization, and better
intuition. None of bezo's automation ideas has anything to do with workers.

~~~
andrekandre
it takes two to tango

entrepreneurs without workers are just some guy in a room with an "idea"

at some point, the distribution and sharing of the profit becomes unfair
(workers also risk a lot too, as they can be fired at-will, and loose thier
livelyhood at any time at the whim of the owner) and this is the fundamental
problem we are facing i think

~~~
DeonPenny
No an entrepreneur in a room before raising money can easily be worth millions
and that typically what happens. The workers come to help scale the business
but to say they get nothing is untrue. They don't take as much risk and their
share should be what they negotiate for.

The fact is thats exactly what a price or wage is. Fideling with prices
because you personally don't like the number two people determined what a
worker is worth typically ends in disaster. No matter who it is who trying to
price adjust they are usually to ignorant of all parts of the business the to
know enough to pick a correct wage or price for labor.

------
gnusty_gnurc
there's many disparities in _any_ system often for completely benign or
intentional reasons

~~~
skitout
In many ways, there is more disparities now than before...

~~~
gnusty_gnurc
People are customizing their lives in ways that were never possible in the
past. They're free to consume things they like, the barrier for distributing
content to the world has never been lower. It's hard for me to believe that a
world of infinite individual variation will lead to equal outcomes - or that
it ever should. Thomas Sowell writes about ubiquitous natural variation like
geography, culture, etc. and how it all leads to very "unequal" outcomes, but
there's nothing inherently evil about it.

~~~
skitout
Inflation adjusted wages lower than 45 years ago despite massive productivity
gain... there's nothing inherently evil about it ?

