So to keep up with the cost of living, that second income helps, then? Imagine that.
absolutely. once again, you've proven a point no one disagrees with. nice work, esquire.
So to keep up with the cost of living, that second income helps, then? Imagine that.
absolutely. once again, you've proven a point no one disagrees with. nice work, esquire.
Median household income has risen 5 grand while the percentage of duel earning households has nearly doubled.
This graph only measures dual earners for households with kids. Most "households" don't even have kids.
The problem with this debate is that people are confusing income and wealth. Both have risen, but wealth is rising faster. Marriage is a big driver of wealth inequality. Compare a single mother and a married couple and say that everyone makes $40,000 per year. The single mom will have to spend it all on living expenses. The couple spends less on living expenses (i.e. buying one coffee maker instead of two) and has more to invest in things like a home or retirement fund. Same income, but different levels of wealth. A big reason that "the rich are getting richer" is because a larger number of people are not getting and staying married. Single people spend more on their cost of living than on assets and wealth. Wealth also earns interests and produces even more wealth.
The political narrative is that "inequality" is all driven by income. This is because 1. politicians tax income (not wealth) and want to raise the income tax, and 2. union contracts implement wage hikes whenever the minimum wage increases. It is true that income is rising slowly and that higher incomes would somewhat improve wealth inequality, but there are also much bigger factors at play.
Some obstinate bullshit if I've ever heard it. Please try and find data on the percentage of duel earning households through time. Anyways, since you're so skeptical here is a stat from the DOL - between 1986 and 1998 there was a 20% increase in duel earning households.This graph only measures dual earners for households with kids. Most "households" don't even have kids.
The problem with this debate is that people are confusing income and wealth. Both have risen, but wealth is rising faster. Marriage is a big driver of wealth inequality. Compare a single mother and a married couple and say that everyone makes $40,000 per year. The single mom will have to spend it all on living expenses. The couple spends less on living expenses (i.e. buying one coffee maker instead of two) and has more to invest in things like a home or retirement fund. Same income, but different levels of wealth. A big reason that "the rich are getting richer" is because a larger number of people are not getting and staying married. Single people spend more on their cost of living than on assets and wealth. Wealth also earns interests and produces even more wealth.
The political narrative is that "inequality" is all driven by income. This is because 1. politicians tax income (not wealth) and want to raise the income tax, and 2. union contracts implement wage hikes whenever the minimum wage increases. It is true that income is rising slowly and that higher incomes would somewhat improve wealth inequality, but there are bigger factors at play. Contrary to popular belief and PhDeac's graphic, the "typical worker" in in 1965 did not earn $70,000 per year or any more than he does now.
Some obstinate bullshit if I've ever heard it. Please try and find data on the percentage of duel earning households through time. Anyways, since you're so skeptical here is a stat from the DOL - between 1986 and 1998 there was a 20% increase in duel earning households.
http://www.dol.gov/dol/aboutdol/history/herman/reports/futurework/conference/families/couples.htm
I suppose you're confident that the income of those households rose accordingly. It's amazing to me how people refuse to admit that the average individual income has fallen in the last few decades. Unsurprisingly, there is also no data to support the right wing myth that purchasing power has risen over time because of microwaves or the Internet.
Now who's cherry picking? What are the numbers on % of duel earnings households through time? I'm sure that sinful unmarried cohabitation is relevant.