That makes more sense. But keep in mind that only 2.3% of hourly workers make minimum wage.[1] It's not really fair to compare productivity (a mean) or even median output to wages at the second percentile.

It's an interesting question in its own right. Do the very lowest paid people in the economy have it better or worse than 50 years ago. I don't know the full answer to that question, but I do know that in 1968 about 5% of American households didn't have full indoor plumbing.[2] Just based on that datum, I'd much rather trade places with a very poor American in 2020 than 1968.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm [2] https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2004/data/papers/SS0...

When I was in the US, I saw someone offering free phones to the unemployed (Obama phone). Food stamps being used. FEMA given new houses to people left homeless by hurricane Michael.

I even met people whose diet consisted mainly of expired food. They had to fish it out of dumpsters, which wasn't nice. But they had free food!

That makes sense, but why would productivity gains be equally applied across all wage levels? You'd naturally expect it to be unequal based on the productivity gains in specific job functions.

Sorry, I was trying to make it fit the character limit :(

Title-smithing is an art. Email the mods if you're stuck; [email protected]

(I have, with some shorter suggestions.)