patrick.net

LeonDurham says

I just did. The graph in the OP shows real wages are falling. The graph from Magic shows the 1% is getting richer.

End thread.

No you didn't prove anything. Your graph doesn't show who is losing wages at all.

Show proof or you're trolling (trolling posts can be deleted per @Patrick new rules).

So please show dropping wages segmented by income levels, etc.

LeonDurham says

I just did.

From an opinion piece from Bloomberg? Really?

LeonDurham says

Use the data and then explain how it SHOULD be interpreted.

How's this for DATA:

Personal income increased $60.0 billion (0.4 percent) in May according to estimates released today by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Disposable personal income (DPI) increased $63.2 billion (0.4 percent)
and personal consumption expenditures (PCE) increased $27.8 billion (0.2 percent).

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries, personal dividend
income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/pinewsrelease.htm

BTW, THIS is how you use data, not from hit, opinion pieces published at Bloomberg.

Permanently End Thread.

Goran_K says

No you didn't prove anything. Your graph doesn't show who is losing wages at all.

Show proof or you're trolling (trolling posts can be deleted per @Patrick new rules).

So please show dropping wages segmented by income levels, etc.

Now someone posting graphs and explaining what they mean is trolling?? ROFLOL

I said real wages of the 99% are dropping. Since the 1% don't earn wages, they get compensated in other ways, this is completely and totally accurate. And should be obvious.

MrMagic says

Seems like the tax plan is working as designed:

Not an overall fan of Obama, but it's quite a bit disingenuous to screen shot the chart where it was. You can screen shot this anyway you want to make yourself right. Doesn't mean you are.

If you're happy with $400/yr more, kudos to you. I wipe my ass with $400.

The only time I've heard that wages were plummeting was under Obama for two years. Liberals considered it a good thing.
There's no data, reports or news stories to support this hyperbole.

MrMagic says

How's this for DATA:

Personal income increased $60.0 billion (0.4 percent) in May according to estimates released today by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Disposable personal income (DPI) increased $63.2 billion (0.4 percent)
and personal consumption expenditures (PCE) increased $27.8 billion (0.2 percent).

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries, personal dividend
income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/pinewsrelease.htm

BTW, THIS is how you use data, not from hit, opinion pieces published at Bloomberg.

Permanently End Thread.

Again--this is exactly what I'm saying. Income of the top 1% is up, while real WAGES for the rest of the population are down. Consistent with what everyone expected to happen.

Tenpoundbass says

The only time I've heard that wages were plummeting was under Obama for two years. Liberals considered it a good thing.
There's no data, reports or news stories to support this hyperbole.

Listen more often. I posted the data.

WookieMan says

Not an overall fan of Obama, but it's quite a bit disingenuous to screen shot the chart where it was. You can screen shot this anyway you want to make yourself right. Doesn't mean you are.

Please follow along, the thread was about TRUMP driving wages down, and you post a chart from 2013, 2014, 2015...

Geez...

When was the tax bill passed again?

LeonDurham says

I posted the data.

MrMagic says

What do we know about the author of that article?

...."Noah Smith is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He was an assistant professor of finance at Stony Brook University, and he blogs at Noahpinion. "

Why do Liberals always post "Opinion" pieces and try to sell them as "Facts"?

This Liberal Logic stuff is really confusing..

LeonDurham says

Again--this is exactly what I'm saying. Income of the top 1% is up, while real WAGES for the rest of the population are down.

Any idea what this means below:

LeonDurham says

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries,

$400/yr over a year really isn't driving them up either. I like the July '13 to July '16 trend line much better to be honest. My graph shows we're slowing down. No, Trump isn't driving wages down, but the upward trend has slowed, this is undeniable.

If $400 is a big deal, then cool. Good job Trump.

LeonDurham says

Personal income increased $60.0 billion (0.4 percent) in May according to estimates released today by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Disposable personal income (DPI) increased $63.2 billion (0.4 percent)
and personal consumption expenditures (PCE) increased $27.8 billion (0.2 percent).

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries. personal dividend
income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

Yup. End thread.

Apparently, Chucky reads the same Opinion pieces at Bloomberg like the OP.

From Lefty, Liberal Politifact:

Does Trump's tax plan do nothing for low income earners?
https://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2017/oct/08/charles-schumer/does-trumps-tax-plan-do-nothing-low-income-earners/

We rate Schumer's statement False.

Another DATA point (we know Liberals hate facts and data)

Income Tax Revenues Are Up 9% This Year .

The latest monthly budget report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office finds that revenues from federal income taxes were $76 billion higher in the first half of this year, compared with the first half of 2017. That's a 9% jump, even though the lower income tax withholding schedules went into effect in February.

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

The Treasury Department, which issues a separate monthly report, says it expects federal revenues will continue to exceed last year's for the rest of the 2018 fiscal year.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/income-tax-revenues-trump-tax-cuts-economic-growth/

Goran_K says

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries. personal dividend income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

MrMagic says

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

Funny you left off the last part of that sentence. Why is that?

Could it be because you're trolling?

LeonDurham says

MrMagic says

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

Funny you left off the last part of that sentence. Why is that?

Left off what part of the sentence? That was the whole thing..



See something missing there from the sentence? Didn't think so.....

LeonDurham says

Goran_K says

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries. personal dividend income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

Any idea what the definition of "Primarily" could be?

So, two different DATA sources (not Opinion pieces), claim "largely reflects" and "primarily reflects" INCREASES in wages and salaries, yet you're going to accuse me of:

LeonDurham says

trolling?

There isn't a single poster here that can top you in that category!

MrMagic says

That's a 9% jump, even though the lower income tax withholding schedules went into effect in February.

What withholding schedules? Unless you update your W-4, I'm not sure what would change for your typical employee. 98% of people that have the same job, withheld the same amount for federal taxes in 2018 as they did in 2017 as a percentage. A 9% increase is a good sign for the economy, but there's not a person here that can judge this whole thing until about this time next year.

I'm hopeful, but claiming victory before the game is over is a bit simplistic. And handing out participation trophies to Trump before there are tangible, LONG term results is also simplistic. Give it time. Anyone here shitting on or praising the tax plan should probably just stick to their day job and comment on stuff they understand.

WookieMan says

What withholding schedules? Unless you update your W-4, I'm not sure what would change for your typical employee.

Updated Withholding Calculator, Form W-4 Released; Calculator Helps Taxpayers Review Withholding Following New Tax Law
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/updated-withholding-calculator-form-w-4-released-calculator-helps-taxpayers-review-withholding-following-new-tax-law

My suggestion, just stop posting while you're ahead.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Treasury Department on Wednesday unveiled a tax calculator created after passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

“The tool will help taxpayers determine whether they should update their W-4s,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said during a press conference, referring to the form that employees use to determine the amount withheld. “It will also be a tool taxpayers can use to figure out, to update their information as they experience life changes.”
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/irs-unveils-tax-calculator-does-your-w-4-need-to-be-updated

MrMagic says

Left off what part of the sentence? That was the whole thing..

No, it's because the lying source that you copy and paste cut it off. (I'll note you don't link to it like everyone else does)

The entire sentence is the one I posted.

MrMagic says

So, two different DATA sources (not Opinion pieces), claim "largely reflects" and "primarily reflects" INCREASES in wages and salaries, yet you're going to accuse me of:

No, they claim:

LeonDurham says

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries. personal dividend income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐

LeonDurham says

MrMagic says

Left off what part of the sentence? That was the whole thing..

No, it's because the lying source that you copy and paste cut it off. (I'll note you don't link to it like everyone else does)

The entire sentence is the one I posted.

WTF are you talking about, I did a screen grab of the source? Do you need your glasses cleaned?

MrMagic says

My suggestion, just stop posting while you're ahead.

Lol! Comedy isn't your bit. Please tell me you're not serious?

MrMagic says

“The tool will help taxpayers determine whether they should update their W-4s,”

Which 98% of Americans won't do. As mentioned and clearly ignored. Nobody is adjusting their withholdings. So the withholding "schedules" mean nothing and you know it. Not sure why what I posted even warranted a response from you either.

WookieMan says

98% of people that have the same job, withheld the same amount for federal taxes in 2018 as they did in 2017 as a percentage.

We can either have a conversation or you can continually throw darts at ANYONE here that challenges your views. If you were that right all the time and brilliant, you surely wouldn't be here (no offense meant Patrick).

I clearly said the 9% increase is a good sign. It means SHIT until this time next year unfortunately. I have no intention of giving Trump a participation trophy like most Boomers do with him and their kids. I'm doing good and it seems most are. The dude fucking just SIGNED his FIRST budget and we're going to go along like the place is 100% better?

Fact is, I do good. I don't need a fucking president to do anything for me. But if that's your tit to suck on, by all means do it. I make my own way.

WookieMan says

Which 98% of Americans won't do. As mentioned and clearly ignored.

Because it's not backed by facts or links, just ypur hyperbole.

WookieMan says

We can either have a conversation or you can continually throw darts at ANYONE here that challenges your views.

That's really funny, coming from someone who won't back up statements with facts or data.

Please post the data stating where 98% of Americans won't update or look at their W-4. I'll be waiting....

LeonDurham says

MrMagic says

So, two different DATA sources (not Opinion pieces), claim "largely reflects" and "primarily reflects" INCREASES in wages and salaries, yet you're going to accuse me of:

No, they claim:

LeonDurham says

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries. personal dividend income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

Care to scroll back up where I posted this in post #24:

MrMagic says

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries, personal dividend
income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

Which part did I leave out again?

MrMagic says

Any idea what the definition of "Primarily" could be?

So, two different DATA sources (not Opinion pieces), claim "largely reflects" and "primarily reflects" INCREASES in wages and salaries, yet you're going to accuse me of:

LeonDurham says

trolling?

There isn't a single poster here that can top you in that category!

and I'll go one step further in supporting that statement.

From the bea tables:




Please point out which part of "wages and salaries. personal dividend income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income" is the largest in that table.

Does that fit the definition of "largely reflects" and "primarily reflects" INCREASES in wages and salaries? Inquiring minds want to know.

MrMagic says

WTF are you talking about, I did a screen grab of the source? Do you need your glasses cleaned?

No, your source didn't grab the entire quote. That's my point.

MrMagic says

Which part did I leave out again?

MrMagic says

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

Does that help?

LeonDurham says

MrMagic says

Which part did I leave out again?

MrMagic says

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

Does that help?

Huh.???

LeonDurham says

MrMagic says

WTF are you talking about, I did a screen grab of the source? Do you need your glasses cleaned?

No, your source didn't grab the entire quote. That's my point.

The ENTIRE sentence and quote from the article is up in my comment #36. WTF are you looking at? The article link is there too, plus I did the screen cap of the page.

Seriously, is this the best you can do?

I'm still waiting for this answer:

MrMagic says

Please point out which part of "wages and salaries. personal dividend income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income" is the largest in that table.

Does that fit the definition of "largely reflects" and "primarily reflects" INCREASES in wages and salaries?

Bueller?

MrMagic says

The ENTIRE sentence and quote from the article is up in my comment #36. WTF are you looking at? The article link is there too, plus I did the screen cap of the page.

Seriously, is this the best you can do?

I'm still waiting for this answer:

I'm not sure how to explain this to you any more clearly. The entire quote from the CBO is what I keep showing you. The source you posted conveniently left off the end of the quote.

This is a lesson for those at Pat.net who continually claim bias in sources. When doing so, one has to also show what the source misrepresented in order to have any real merit. In this case, I showed that the source purposely left off part of the quote to mispresent what was said. That is source bias.

Aphroman says

Patrick is this true? Where can we go to read your new rules?

Are we supposed to mark trolling posts as personal?

@Aphroman the rules are here:

https://patrick.net/post/1315267/2018-04-14-patrick-net-moderation-policy

Please don't mark a post as personal unless it is personally about another user. The tipoff is usually the word "you".

LeonDurham says

Since the 1% don't earn wages, they get compensated in other ways

Actually, most of the 1% in terms of income do earn wages. Lots of doctors and lawyers in there. And the majority of people are in the 1% of income at some point in their lives, so I've heard.

The important point, never mentioned in the press, is that the distribution of assets is spectacularly more lopsided than the distribution in incomes.



Income is pretty much irrelevant.

The Trump plan is not driving down wages. It just isn't doing anything to stop the trend. I doubt there is much that any lefty or righty policy can do. The 1% are doing well by it though.

HowdyThere says

The Trump plan is not driving down wages. It just isn't doing anything to stop the trend. I doubt there is much that any lefty or righty policy can do. The 1% are doing well by it though.

I think this is partially to mostly true. But it is striking how much real wages have gone down since the Trump tax plan went into effect.

Patrick says

Lots of doctors and lawyers in there

The vast majority of lawyers in the top 1% aren't there because of their wages....

LeonDurham says

I'm not sure how to explain this to you any more clearly. The entire quote from the CBO is what I keep showing you. The source you posted conveniently left off the end of the quote.

You're still confused, I guess we'll have to go back to square one. You're mixing up the two articles and data

I posted Two different articles from Two different sources with the same result. I didn't leave anything out, so I'll requote each one for you:

The first one, from the BEA, I highlighted the questionable sentence in bold:

MrMagic says

How's this for DATA:

Personal income increased $60.0 billion (0.4 percent) in May according to estimates released today by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Disposable personal income (DPI) increased $63.2 billion (0.4 percent)
and personal consumption expenditures (PCE) increased $27.8 billion (0.2 percent).

The increase in personal income in May primarily reflected increases in wages and salaries, personal dividend
income, and nonfarm proprietors’ income.

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/pinewsrelease.htm

Now, the second one, from Investors and data from the CBO:

MrMagic says

Income Tax Revenues Are Up 9% This Year .

The latest monthly budget report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office finds that revenues from federal income taxes were $76 billion higher in the first half of this year, compared with the first half of 2017. That's a 9% jump, even though the lower income tax withholding schedules went into effect in February.

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

The Treasury Department, which issues a separate monthly report, says it expects federal revenues will continue to exceed last year's for the rest of the 2018 fiscal year.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/income-tax-revenues-trump-tax-cuts-economic-growth/

See, in both comments, the sentences are intact and complete, you're confusion comes from not understanding that one came from the BEA and one from the CBO. They both had the same end conclusions, wages and salaries have risen, contrary to your OP.

Do you see the difference in the two sentences yet and the two articles from two different sources?

Then you post this:

LeonDurham says

MrMagic says

The CBO says the gain "largely reflects increases in wages and salaries."

Funny you left off the last part of that sentence. Why is that?

Could it be because you're trolling?

So, you'll insinuate that I'm a liar and a troll because you're having difficulties with reading comprehension between two different articles.. That's OK, you can call me a troll, everyone here knows that's just projecting. I know how important the OP was, since it was an opinion hit piece coming from the Trump hating Liberal Bloomberg, and that's really important to keep promoting that narrative.

lol--the CBO didn't comment on it at all, it was almost certainly the BEA. So, the article you posted actually got the source and the quote wrong.

Again that's called source bias.

MrMagic says

So, you'll insinuate that I'm a liar and a troll because you're having difficulties with reading comprehension between two different articles.. That's OK, you can call me a troll, everyone here knows that's just projecting. I know how important the OP was, since it was an opinion hit piece coming from the Trump hating Liberal Bloomberg, and that's really important to keep promoting that narrative.

No, I stated that the source you posted is biased and wrong. Then I wondered why it is that you didn't link to it so we could read the entire article and see what the source is.

LeonDurham says

No, I stated that the source you posted is biased and wrong.

So, you're insinuating that sentence didn't come from the CBO and I'm lying?

LeonDurham says

Then I wondered why it is that you didn't link to it so we could read the entire article and see what the source is.

You don't see the hyperlinks to both articles?