I had a much longer comment detailing my problems with this article, but it got quite unwiedly by the end being confused about various statements and representations of data. I won't touch upon those things as it seems others have already given some thought into a portion of the same topics.
I find it interesting that the key numbers rarely change, beginning years are deliberately used (1978), even though there is nothing really significant about 1978 in particular for economic terms. But why keep using that as the same starting year through so many articles through the years?
It also appears that Josh Bivens is Keynesian in beliefs. Previous articles support this beginning from ~2009 onwards, and becoming more apparent through to the 2012 US Presidential election. Bivens has rather strong support for Occupy Wall Street, numerous articles stating as much.
I'd like to talk about Josh Bivens in general, this article appears to be a continuation of a similar one done in 2019: https://www.epi.org/publication/reining-in-ceo-compensation-..., and another one from 2013: https://www.epi.org/publication/pay-corporate-executives-fin..., yet another in 2011: https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-ratio-average-worker/
I find it interesting that the key numbers rarely change, beginning years are deliberately used (1978), even though there is nothing really significant about 1978 in particular for economic terms. But why keep using that as the same starting year through so many articles through the years?
It also appears that Josh Bivens is Keynesian in beliefs. Previous articles support this beginning from ~2009 onwards, and becoming more apparent through to the 2012 US Presidential election. Bivens has rather strong support for Occupy Wall Street, numerous articles stating as much.