Re:50% of All Workers Made Less than $26,000 in 2010
by protomyth on Friday October 21, 2011 @01:17AM
(#3138541)
Well, I was interested because 2009 is the only dip year in their data. The distribution data is not as interesting to me given what they ignore in income and location.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:50% of All Workers Made Less than $26,000 in 2010
by tomkarlo on Friday October 21, 2011 @02:27AM
(#3138697)
Yeah, but you don't know if it's a dip because the typical person made less, or the richest 1% made less. Given that 2009 was a recession, you'd expect average to be down either way (since population didn't change appreciably.)
That's the problem with averages.
Re:50% of All Workers Made Less than $26,000 in 2010
by protomyth on Friday October 21, 2011 @02:11PM
(#3140930)
That's the thing though, it is the only dip in their data. I am really curious how other recession periods didn't have the dip.
Re:50% of All Workers Made Less than $26,000 in 2010
by tomkarlo on Friday October 21, 2011 @02:18PM
(#3140963)
Could just be a timing issue. Recessions are measured on quarterly performance, this is annual. So you could have two quarters of negative growth in a row (a recession) and still have overall positive growth for the year.
Also, wages/employment are sticky because of the friction in changing them... companies will generally change comp slower than the change in sales (in both directions.)