Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (341054)	6/21/2007 4:17:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1583503

Are low wage Americans relatively better off than they used to be? That's not nearly as important of question in my opinion as either "Are American workers better off than they used to be?" or "Are low wage American workers better off than they used to be?" If I could double my real income, while the real income of everyone else tripled. I would not have a problem with it. I care more about absolute results then relative in this context. Doing better is more important than doing relatively better. But I don't actually think the question you ask has zero importance, just not a lot of importance. To answer you might take total compensation growth of different income segments and compare their growth rates. This would be the perfect way to answer it, if everyone staid in the same income segment. Since they don't its far from ideal, but still better then any other stats I can think of.