Mother Jones - Comments for "Median Wages"

fashion Tiffany

fashion Tiffany Rings
fashion Tiffany bangles
fashion Tiffany Bracelets
fashion Tiffany Cuff
fashion Tiffany Earrings
fashion Tiffany Necklaces

fashion Tiffany

fashion Tiffany Necklaces
fashion Tiffany sets
fashion Tiffany Accessories
rings sale
bangles sale
bracelets sale
cuff sale
earrings sale
necklaces sale
sets sale
accessories sale
Tiffany Rings replica
Tiffany bangles replica
Tiffany Bracelets replica
Tiffany Cuff replica
Tiffany Earrings replica
Tiffany Necklaces replica
Tiffany sets replica
Tiffany Accessories replica
fake Tiffany Rings
fake Tiffany bangles
fake Tiffany Bracelets
fake Tiffany Cuff

In fact, chances are the

In fact, chances are the small, sneaky manufacturers will also try to sell their replicas as genuine, thus tricking the customer into believing they found the real thing at a bargain price. A good Rolex replica should have a solid 18 karat gold band, and not some other innovations that you might encounter. Triple wrapped gold bands look good too, but higher quality replica Rolexes have a solid band.
oris watch for sale
Panerai watch for sale

Piaget watch for sale
Rado watch for sale
Tag Heuer watch for sale
Tudor watch for sale
U-boat watch for sale

Rolex watch for sale
Rolex Air-King watch for sale
Rolex Datejust II watch for sale

Patek Philippe watch for

Patek Philippe watch for sale
Rado watch for sale
Tag Heuer watch for sale
Tudor watch for sale
U-Boat watch for sale
Vacheron Constantin watch for sale
Watch Accessories for sale
Rolex Air King watch for sale
Rolex DateJust watch for sale
Rolex Day Date watch for sale
Rolex Daytona watch for sale
Rolex Explorer watch for sale
Rolex GMT watch for sale
Rolex Masterpiece watch for sale

replica Rolex Datejust

replica Rolex Datejust II
replica Rolex Datejust
replica Rolex Submariner
replica Yachtmaster
replica Rolex Day-Date II
replica Rolex Daytona
replica Rolex Explorer
replica Rolex GMT
replica Rolex Sea-Dweller
replica Rolex Day Date
replica Rolex Masterpiece
replica Rolex Milgauss

replica watch replica

replica watch
replica A.Lange & Sohne
replica Alain Silberstein
replica Audemars Piguet
replica Bell & Ross
replica Breguet
replica Breitling
replica Burberry
replica Bvlgari
replica Cartier
replica chopard
replica Concord
replica croum
replica DeWitt
replica ebel
replica Ferrari
replica Franck Muller
replica Glashutte
replica Grahamv
replica Hermes
replica Hublot
replica IWC
replica Jaquet droz
replica Lady Watch
replica Longines
replica Louis Vuitton
replica Maurice Lacroix
replica Montblanc
replica movado
replica omega
replica oris
replica Panerai
replica Patek Philippe
replica Piaget
replica Rado
replica Tag Heuer
replica Tudor
replica U-boat
replica Vacheron Constantin
replica Rolex
replica Rolex Air-King

median vs mean wage

You have to take the median wage compared to the avg wage and also consider total working. You get the same thing you are stating but you keep the crazies from having any ability of misdirection. I would like a salary cap like NFL for corporations. Or a salary ratio for corporations over $50 billion. This mandated ratio will act as a wage increaser for all. much like unions would do but they have the company and employees at heart not their own pockets.

Kevin asks "How do we make this happen, though?"

Perhaps one way would be to treat payments of salaries (and other remunerations) in excess of a corporation's (or the national) median salary as a distribution of income. They would then not be deductible as a business expense in computing corporate income taxes. This would reduce the incentive for payouts above the median.

Free Trade Liberal Economist: In PPP terms, it's about $8 trillion vs. $14 trillion in favor of the US.

Is that before or after the World Bank's sudden 40% reduction in their estimate of China's PPP GDP? Gotta have confidence in finely tuned numbers like that.

Either way the nitpicking hardly detracts from my point that per capita PPP GDP is what counts in terms of standard of living, not aggregate PPP GDP. If you like though I can rephrase the example as China vs. Switzerland.

Whenever I find myself nodding in agreement with someone holding a tiny minority view, my default suspicion is that I'm agreeing with him because I'm looking for an "objective" backup for my prejudices.

Good point. Similarly whenever I find myself nodding in agreement with a majority view simply because it's a majority, and not because I've examined it critically, my default suspicion is that I'm agreeing with it because I'm looking for an "objective" backup for my prejudices.

Worse, sometimes I find myself criticizing a view contrary to my own on the sole basis that the other person's view is a minority view.

Your critique accepted, I have one last question: could you quantify the "tiny minority" you referred to? I assume that in the interests of objectivity you have some sort of poll result or something, and wouldn't let mere bias cause you to use an adjective like "tiny".

In my own defense though I never mix descriptions of what's supposed to be an objective, scientific pursuit (say "economist") with a description of my political bias (say "liberal").

immigration today exerts about 25% of the effect on wages it did a hundred years ago.

Interesting conclusion that the influence is only 25% of what it was, even though the percentage of the population who are immigrants today is over 80% of what it was at its peak.

China already has a higher PPP GDP than the US

Er, no, Alex, it does not. In PPP terms, it's about $8 trillion vs. $14 trillion in favor of the US. It's obviously a much larger advantage for the US using exchange rate values. Your statement will probably be correct in another fifteen or twenty years.

Inevitably if you do a search on his name you'll find him pilloried for daring to suggest that the law of supply and demand still holds, and that having vast numbers of unskilled (legal and illegal) immigrants over the last 30 years has helped driven down the wages of less skilled Americans.

Er, no, Alex. Absolutely no credible economist would argue with the notion that unskilled immigration "helps" put downward pressure on wages. Where nearly all of them disagree with Borjas is degree: he thinks the effect is major; nearly everybody else in the field disagrees with his findings. Whenever I find myself nodding in agreement with someone holding a tiny minority view, my default suspicion is that I'm agreeing with him because I'm looking for an "objective" backup for my prejudices. Might I make a suggestion?

The end of the war and the resumption of mass immigration brought an end to all of labor's gain in the war.

False. Immigration restrictions gradually tightened as the 20th century progressed -- reaching a maximum stinginess about 1930 -- fully ten years before the introduction of the draft -- and coinciding with the onset of depression (a lot of good restricting immigration did for our economy!). Mid 20th century draconian restrictions on immigration weren't lifted until the last 60s. But even then the US never adopted anything resembling a "mass" immigration policy. The country currently permits a net immigration rate of about .33% per annum -- a net rate less than one quarter of what she permitted circa 1900. Now, that was an era of "mass immigration." To put it another way, immigration today exerts about 25% of the effect on wages it did a hundred years ago. Or, one more way to see it: the economy is vastly larger in real terms -- probably thirty or forty times larger -- than it was a century ago, and yet the number of immigrants entering the US each year hasn't increased over this time. So, if we had deliberately followed a policy of restricting immigration over these many years in order to try and boost wages, this is where we would have ended up. Very clearly, over the long term the influence of immigration on American wages has declined over the decades.

Mercer: the freezing of immigration during the war - which happened three years before the US drafted men into the army - strengthened the bargaining power of labor unions

That period was also the beginning of the great northern migration of black people from the South to the North, due to folks getting work in the northern factories.

Northern factories even sent recruiters down South. Some of them ran into trouble though, and were all but tarred and feathered. Seems some Southerners didn't like the idea of their "Negro problem" being solved by Yankee recruiters hiring them away - they knew full well that the Southern economy depended heavily on their cheap labor.

Similarly in WWII: factories that previously wouldn't have considered hiring women started hiring them in droves. It's amazing how a tight labor market can open employer's minds (and wallets) about who to hire.

I recently read a book about the US in WWI -David Kennedy's Over Here.

Kennedy mentioned several times in the book how the freezing of immigration during the war - which happened three years before the US drafted men into the army - strengthened the bargaining power of labor unions.

The end of the war and the resumption of mass immigration
brought an end to all of labor's gain in the war.

tpx: You have not provided an example that demonstrates limiting immigration raises median incomes.

Good, because I never said that limiting the immigration rate raises median incomes. Although if I had made that claim, the post-WWII example would be a good one. In fact I introduced that example to counter your broad assertion that "limiting immigration reduces economic growth, stifles it and can even kill it".

What I did claim was that "the reality is that (legal and illegal) immigration does have an effect on wages. What that effect is depends on the pattern of immigration". A good example is the last 30 years.

Of course there are other factors too. To get beyond the pissing contest stage, you have to look at serious econometric studies that attempt to weigh all the factors. George Borjas is an economist who is a good source on this. I couldn't find a decent online cite for him, but he's written some good books. Inevitably if you do a search on his name you'll find him pilloried for daring to suggest that the law of supply and demand still holds, and that having vast numbers of unskilled (legal and illegal) immigrants over the last 30 years has helped driven down the wages of less skilled Americans. It's rumored that at one time he suggested burning such people at the stake, but has since moderated his views and thinks that we should have a Canadian style points system for determining who can immigrate to the US.

I can provide a lot more examples if you like.

You have not provided an example that demonstrates limiting immigration raises median incomes.

Luther,

You ever hear that the meanest pecker on the totem pole is the one second from the bottom?

He gets the most pecking from those above and has someone to take it out on.

Construction wages fell because of the collapse of unions. You should gripe about the scabs instead of including all the immigrants in your bunch.

Bosses know that one way to control the poor is to set them against each other.