[quote=no_such_reality][quote=Rich Toscano]
I was talking about this part:
[quote]During that period median income was essentially flat moving from $63K to $64K.[/quote]
No, I don’t think the census got it wrong, but you are confusing inflation-adjusted figures for nominal ones.[/quote]
That’s actually getting worse. FRED has data showing that. Other research shows that. Even research showing the millenials in spite of being better educated actually make 20% less than their baby boomer counterparts at the same point in the lives. And contrary to some opinions, it’s not because they’re lazy slackers, that’s us Gen-Xers.
And I’m not confusing inflation adjusted and not. Over 5 years, especially, recent 5 years, it’s pretty minimal, 8.7% over the period according to CPI.
You can chain it all the way back to 2000, 4.6% making over $150K, that’s $206K in 2015 dollars. Can we call it 4.6% making over $200K in 2015 dollar in 2000? It’s 2.8% of households growth in that segment.[/quote]
I don’t understand what you are trying to say here. I’m not talking about the ranges (over 150k or whatever), I am talking about this sentence:
“During that period median income was essentially flat moving from $63K to $64K.”
INFLATION ADJUSTED income went from 63-64k. Nominal income (which is what’s implied when you just say “income”) increased a lot more than that.
