Is this real or bullshit?

if real, what happened? And why did it start in the early 70s?

source: epi.org/publication/understanding-the-historic-divergence-between-productivity-and-a-typical-workers-pay-why-it-matters-and-why-its-real/

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/01/art3full.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Oh, it's real. I think we got scammed by neoliberals.

Laziness. Work harder!

Mass immigration, outsourcing, cheap credit, globalism, neoliberalism, Private debt, etc

It's very simple really

computers probably

That graph is retarded - it's using the same axis for what amounts to massively different metrics.

The tax raises and austerity will continue until morale improves!

It's real and that's when we went off the gold standard.

This basically

Boomers are retarded for adopting neolib faggotry

But then boomers are retarded in general

Pareto's 80/20 rule, it's why I only work a few hours a week baby.

Technology made everything a lot more efficient, retard

>percentage is a different metric

and automation. union faggots lost their overcompensated jobs and a large number of meek nerds picked up IT, QA, and other low-skill technician jobs for perfecting and maintaining machines.

Computers, robotics, machines speeding up production. All shit the company paid for to improve profits.

>And why did it start in the early 70s?

Immigration reform in the 60s.

Its fake. They're only looking at American workers. If you look at global wages, they have been going up with productivity. Here are China's wages, for example.

Of course its real. Much of this is due to computers and advances in machinery that make workers more productive, but effectively replace many of them. That and the fact that unions power has eroded tremendously and that capital has ben favored over labor in government/tax policy almost universally. Also, this graph is totally valid and we should be crafting policy to address it, but it does not factor in the flip side of this coin that is that purchasing power has risen enormously since the mid 70s. In the US, almost everyone has air conditioning and elextronics that undoubtedly has made our lives easier, more convenient and more comfortable since the mid 70s...there is indeed an absolutely undeniable improvement in the average standard of living, despite very little real gain in income. Again; that doesnt mean we can overlook this problem, its just not as dire as this one chart might suggest.

Computers happened

Now you don't have to pay that mathematican for doing your calculations, just tell an intern to throw those numbers in the matrix and you get same/better results

>Automation leads to lower wages

Jesus Christ can you even read a graph?

Automation rose wages from the beginning of the industrial revolution onwards. Any increase in productivity raises real wages all things being equal.

But all things aren't equal because we have mass immigration and outsourcing

Abandonment of objective currency.

Wrong

Where did all these neoluddites come from? Computers don't lower wages

not a monetary policy expert, but how does their actions to artificially devalue their currency play into this...as it is pegged to the USD i believe

I only work 3 days a week but they are 12 and a half our shifts. I start the day going fast and doing really good beating everyone's rates but 6 hours in I start to slow down because I realize I still have 6 fucking hours left.

I work at Amazon and we are supposed to go through inventory and find damages, missing barcodes, and return old inventory to vendors. I go through about 50 boxes an hour and the average is 12. Sometimes faster or slower depending on how I feel or the amount in the boxes.

I can say personally I feel I work better the beginning of the shift and slow down towards the end because of the long hours I feel they lose out on productivity big time.

but wouldn't it skew the productivity relative to wage increases??

More luddites

WTF is wrong with this board

Technology increases real wages you fucking morons

you're watching the benefits of capital ownership pool into fewer and fewer hands with the decline of distributional economics, but keep voting for billionaire class anti-tax puppets.

Probably some neo-liberal bullshit. I don't trust any of their "statistics" anymore.

>implying worker productivity and compensation should be related

>the year is X
>you're running a factory producing foos
>it takes 100 workers to meet the demand for foos

>the year is X+N
>the population has grown by a factor of 2
>naturally, demand for foos grows by a factor of 2
>thanks to technology, your worker's productivity has grown by a factor of 2
>you manage to meet the demand for foos without hiring new workers
>however, the supply of labor has grown by a factor of 2

What do you think happens to the value of the factory workers at this point?
Economics 101.

12hr work days what?

>not realizing this is caused by de-coupling from the gold standard

Not when technology displaces workers jobs faster than it creates new ones.

The labor market defines wages, not average productivity

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

and women in the workplace like never before

No because any productivity increase results in increased surplus, lowering costs and freeing up demand in the rest of the economy, resulting in higher demand overall and therefore higher wages

By Sup Forumss luddite logic the industrial revolution should have made everyone poorer

5th shift

Women joined the workforce and diluted the labor pool

Immigrants only exacerbated the problem

Yea but I am off 4 days a week. It fucking sucks sometimes but the 4 days of sitting on my ass are nice.

Those days are common, in food industry or even in retail. In corrections it's 14 a day. Easy work does not exist.

>he spouts buzzwords
>he cannot address the following argument

Yes, it's true. Basically since the end of the gold standard the wages are stagnating, while the producitivity per person is increasing further.

This.

Just keep working goys and stop complaining!

Winner winner

Muh women muh immigrants is actually a legitimate issue.

This. Some people made a hell of lot of money off this move off the backs of work that was not their own.

Productivity increases the amount of demand available in the economy and therefore drives wages and living standards up

By your terrible logic the industrial revolution should have led to massive African tier poverty

Percentage is the same metric Pajeet

I already did

Tech increases productivity and wages and living standards by freeing up overall demand

as others mentioned:
-move from gold to fiat
-immigration
-offshoring jobs
and
-recovery of the rest of the world economy

remember that USSR and europe were bombed to shit in WWII and it took a while to rebuild and become competitive again.

Economic student here. It's fake. There's a similar study by the bureau of labor that shows that productivity has kept up. Don't trust anything from the epi. They're socialist.

This.

It happened even in Japan, where there are no immigrants, anti-import protectionism and women have a low labor force participation rate.

The actual reason is a change in central bank policies that's difficult to explain to non-economists.

>Productivity increases the amount of demand available in the economy
Productivity increases the supply. Stop pulling new economic laws out of your ass. If you think productivity increases demand, you have to show the mechanism by which this happens and prove that it offsets other more obvious considerations. We both know you're not going to do this, though.

...

>bring in hungry migrants
>wages go down

Nowhere does this say it was adjusted for inflation. This is meaningless without knowing that.

Abandoning the gold standard

The stagflation never ended.

Labor productivity decreased in Japan along with wages thanks to their real estate bubble popping

Why do idiots love shilling for property bubbles?

>Tech increases productivity and wages and living standards by freeing up overall demand
Making a claim doesn't make it true. It doesn't follow from the basic laws of economics that increase in productivity should lead to increase in wages, but rather the opposite. If you think something more complex is going on, prove it.

bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/01/art3full.pdf

Go to page 59. This is official data. Anything from the economic policy institute is shit.

Do you know how the misleading results were cooked?

Just stop it all you retards. If you don't have anything to do with economics, don't even argue about because it makes you sound stupid. The ones that actually know something get snowed under.

The widespread use of computers in the office environment -> increased productivity/less effort
The movement from a gold back standard to fiat currency on the world reserve ($)
Third wave feminism and the introduction of more and more women intop the workplace -> driving down wages

How are you this dim? An increase in supply drives down costs opening up demand in the rest of the economy

This leads to increased demand and higher wages overall

By your own awfully backwards ass logic the steam engine should have ruined the world because it increased productivity

That's cause they were very low to begin with.
American wages were not low enough on the GLOBAL workforce market.

The industrial revolution resulted in massive amounts of new jobs because it opened up these industries that were never possible before. This technology revolution we are dealing with these past 40 years has largely reduced the need for labor, not increased it. Its not the same, friend.
But governemnt/tax policy has favored capital over labor at the very time where the forces of progress have also favored capital over labor. More and more, rich folks can use their money to buy machines and computers to produce their goods with fewer and fewer workers...and also pay less tax on their income from that capital than the workers pay for the income from their labor. And because unions have been degraded, workers are getting the short end of the stick (i am no real fan of unions and their curroption, but they serve an important purpose in the power dynamics between capital and labor)

>Supply and demand doesn't exist

Ok

this. i hate these threads.

>Reduced the need for labor

Except the billions of asians

>Fags on this board unironically believe Trump will fix this

You are one of the (80%) people that only contribute 20% of the productivity?

Oh and the tens of millions of Mestizos

He could if he wanted to

>An increase in supply drives down costs
Not if the demand increases as well due to population growth. (As in the example I offered)

>opening up demand in the rest of the economy
Not if productivity increases in the rest of the economy as well

>Supply and demand
Vaguely implying that your conclusion follows from the laws of supply and demand (while openly disregarding them) is not a rational argument.

Try again.

It's not worth look at. The differences between productivity and compensation is primary due to globalization and tech. Businesses nowadays spend far more on tech and foreign workers than they used to, so there is less money to distribute to native workers.

So can you try to explain these central banking changes?

Yes one result of productivity increases is increased population. But I was talking in the sense of "all else being equal", like most people when trying to explain basic economic concepts, genius

If productivity increases in the rest of the economy it just means an endless cycle of more supply, higher wages and higher living standards which is what the West experienced for about 100 years or so before globalist faggotry in the 70s

higher productivity results in lower demand for labour therefore lower wages.

The productivity in this time period (especially late 90s-2000s) continued to go up, but labour was found cheaper elsewhere i.e. china...therefore americans werent worthy of getting a raise

By the logic of the neoluddites in this thread any increase in production is a travesty

Go back to plowing fields by hand then, idiots

not a tragedy...but realistically capital goes where it can get the highest return...if i can throw 30 zipperheads on a production line for the cost of one burger, its pretty obvious that american wages arent going up.

>But I was talking in the sense of "all else being equal"
But you have not shown that "all else is equal". Our positions in this debate are not symmetrical.

If you're claiming that an increase in productivity MUST ALWAYS lead to an increase in compensation, it is sufficient for me to offer one imaginary counter-example to show that this conclusion is deductively invalid. (Which I've done)

If your claim is that an increase in productivity should have lead to an increase in compensation in a particular case, it's up to you to lay out all the necessary conditions for it to be the case and show that they have been met. You have not done so.

Try again.

But overall demand is increased so wages go up

Productivity decreased costs resulting in demand being freed up to be used in the rest of the economy

The 90s were shit because of the private debt bubble that continues to haunt us not increased technology

you're a dumbfuck

Who is saying that tech progress is bad? It seems to be part of the reason we have this stagnation, but it has also allowed for an undeniably improved standard of living and purchasing power

That has nothing to do with technology

I see a lot of angry ranting, but you are not addressing the argument:

It's because workers agreed on the compensation which they were offered in return for their labor.

Problem is simply there are less jobs than there used to be.

More jobs=higher wage competition=higher wages

Why this is the case is debatable.

it has everything to do with wages

Obviously this

>b-b-but muh evil cabitalists!!

Increased technology leading to higher productivity and supply and lower costs frees up demand everywhere else leading to higher demand for everything else and therefore higher wages

You generally want higher wages and lower prices which is what technology results in.

The development and application of matrix management models replaced traditional topdown heirarchies.

Combined with a departure from specialization and industry into a service sector who's business models stress diversification of service to serve any customers every need.

Since about a year and a half ago, they started pegging it to a basket of global currencies instead of the dollar. The US central bank is the only bank in the world actively trying to raise interest rates. This is raising the value of the dollar relative to every major currency. China can't afford to have that happen because their economy is export based. If their good become more expensive for foreign countries, they will be edged out of the market by other third world economies. Don't take my word for it though, all this information is readily available.

50 bucks says it's when we went off the Gold Standard. 50 more bucks says when I scroll down I'm going to get to read some retards from /leftypol/ desperately explain how this is actually the fault of property rights.

The surplus in productivity/production resulted in an overall surplus of the total economy..as this graph supposedly outlines, theres no shift in demand from other areas when dealing with the aggregate picture. Reducing prices, lowering demand for labour, lowering wages...

please explain the mechanism that creates a causal relationship

An increase in productivity doesn't increase population in a modern country.

You are thinking of the Malthusian growth model which only seems to be correct in developing countries which we are not.

There it is. Nice low-information bullshit to justify theft there, criminal. It warms my heart immensely that criminal Leftists like you will never be allowed to steal from me.

That was my initial point

Outsourcing leads to lower wages. Technology leads to higher real wages.

The problem with the non Western countries is they have adopted globalism instead of localusm. They have no domestic demand which means low wages and living standards. An increase in wages and living standards would be good for them but their elite prefer a low wage plantation/ sweatshop econony

>Increased technology leading to higher productivity and supply and lower costs frees up demand everywhere else leading to higher demand for everything else and therefore higher wages
I have already demonstrated this to be deductively invalid as a general rule, so you don't get to claim it and then imply that it must necessarily hold true in a specific situation.