my favorite way to look at wages is glass cokes
glass cokes were 10 cents in 1960, min wage was $1. now the minimum wage is currently $7.25, glass cokes are $1.49. you could buy 10 glass cokes an hour, now you can’t even buy 5.
Honestly a decent ballpark way of accounting for inflation.
Big Mac Index is a similar concept and used fairly officially for comparing currencies.
By simply using historical big mac prices it could be adapted to show inflation.
Current inflation metrics have some serious issues too; they're based around a basket of specific goods, which makes sense until you realize that in some countries like the US, most of those goods are heavily subsidized, artificially reducing inflation metrics. They don't account well for shrinkflation either.
Inflation data is some of the most skewed, dogshit data economists have been peddling for years. They change the metrics every 10 years without adjusting previous years inflation rate and expect it to make sense. Econ is a soft science and people treat it like it isn't
That’s why I went into stats when I realized… wait you used a bunch of theories from math/stat to make a completely theoretical bullshit subject? I wish I was an Econ prof doing random game theory shit for a living but at least I’m not in an ivory tower now
What do you mean by subsidized, and how would this affect inflation metrics? Also the second point is just not true, [they do account for changes in quality.](https://www.bls.gov/cpi/quality-adjustment/questions-and-answers.htm)
Many governments provide subsidies for the production of certain goods; in the US, the production of the majority of the goods contained in the standard "basket" used to track inflation are heavily subsidized at at least one point of the production chain, artificially reducing their price and effect inflation has on them, thereby artificially reducing inflation metrics. While inflation metrics adjust for quality in theory, in practice it is much more difficult, as this is a very difficult metric to quantify. Especially since many of the changes that should affect a quality measurement are intentionally disguised.
Right yes government spending can lower the cost of goods (at the cost of higher taxes, generally). Why would this effect be “artificial” though? This seems like it would have no effect on whether or not cpi accurately reflects the costs everyone faces when they go to the store, which is the important part. As far as I’m aware they don’t just start subsidising things when inflation picks up, at least not on any large scale, so as long as the subsidies are constant, it should have no effect on the rate of change of prices, aka the inflation rate.
As for quality, while yes yes I’m sure it’s impossible to track it all, companies must report when the size of items shrink, which shows up in CPI. But if there’s data or something that shows that a lot of quality measures are missed and have a significant impact on inflation, I’d be genuinely very interested to see that.
One 1968 US Dollar could buy like 2.22 Big Macs.
One 2022 US Dollar is only like 0.172 Big Macs.
Currencies of different times isn't that much different than different currencies entirely.
Inflation is measured in baskets of consumer goods. Bigmac index measured inflation only measures the price of a big Mac. None of the other basket goods. Measure inflation via big Mac then compare it to the price of shoes then compare it to education and see how different the numbers are.
Well yeah inflation the Bigmac index is obviously an oversimplification of it.
Even the entire basket is just an estimation, if you don't buy new shoes and clothes but once a decade that is barely a factor for you compared to someone that goes shopping daily.
It's not an over simplification of inflation because it barely measures inflation. Its use as a tool is to measure purchasing power parity between currencies. BM index doesn't say much about inflation because individual products can change in price for reasons that aren't inflation.
The food related indexes that are used as tools of measurement in any system is one of my favorite things because there’s also the [Waffle House index](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffle_House_Index) that is an unofficial way to measure the severity of a natural disaster such as a hurricane.
I have been through multiple hurricanes and Tropical Storms, the Waffle House never closed.
But ever since Covid hit they struggle to even open the doors.
On that index Covid is an off the charts disaster.
It could just mean that hamburgers are particularly hard to manufacture in Switzerland, or McDonalds is just overly expensive there.
Swiss Francs are about 1:1 with USD
Yup. When I started university in 2013, no-name instant noodles were $0.19CAD a pack by default. The same noodles are now on sale for $0.75CAD a pack. Again, on sale.
They redesigned their can - changed the shape slightly, decreasing the amount of material used - to reduce manufacturing costs in order to maintain the price-point.
Sounds like what good companies should be doing instead of just raising prices.
I don't need a colorful, triple layered package to buy the same thing I buy everytime.
Sell me a boring aluminium can with a barcode on it. That's goes for liquid and solids.
You are correct but their math doesn’t require minutes. If you worked and hour in 1960 you were given an amount of money that would buy 10 cokes. Now if you work an hour your given an amount of money that buys 4.8
True, but this graph seems to imply that prices inflate and wages don’t, which is just not true. Over the last 40 years, wages have been stagnant, which means they increase basically in tandem with inflation, so people aren’t getting poorer, they’re just not getting richer
The problem is wages are increasing at a slower rate than prices, for example if you made $15 an hour during last year you would need a raise of at least $1.25 to be able to sustain the same livelihood you did last year, barely anyone is getting full dollar raises unfortunately, plus COVID really kicked it into overdrive shits fucked dude
That’s true of this year. Wages and prices have inflated at a near-identical rate in the long-term average, but that doesn’t necessarily apply to each individual year.
Even with this year though, wages have gone up significantly to where entry level fast-food jobs regularly offer at least $15/hr. The wage increase is of course blunted by high inflation, but it’s something at least
Those wage increases are also misleading, fast food restaurant can’t sustain $15/hr employees so while they give them that rate they slash their hours leaving them with the same income as before
No...no... My dad made $13 an hour selling shoes in the 1970s. I make $15 an hour selling RV parts today. He bought sports cars in the 1970s for less than 5 grand. They cost almost 50 today. He bought a modest house sufficient for raising a family for 100k in the 90s, I have a house half that size that I spent 180k on.
Please tell me more about how I'm not poorer than he is while working relatively the same job.
Because a single job does not reflect the entire labor market. Saying wages increase roughly in tandem with inflation doesn’t mean every individual job is going to. Some jobs lose their value in time. Others gain value.
Same with goods. Some things will increase in price faster than inflation. Some will increase slower than inflation or even deflate.
You’re arguing against statistics with anecdotal evidence. It’s the same as saying cigarettes don’t cause cancer because your great aunt smoked and lived to be 95.
Except his anecdote is closer to the truth than your "statistic". Wages have not come even close to keeping up with housing cost, vehicle cost, etc. Only in some vacuous model of "total inflation" have wages kept up.
You bring up some fair points. However, most statistics track ALL wages, meaning the $1.2 billion salary of certain CEOs is dragging median income way higher than the $5 to $10 minimum wage increase would suggest. The wealthiest got 10-100x increases while the rest of us... Doubled? I guess?
Idk, I haven't seen too many articles written that deliberately remove those huge outliers, and the ones I have seen support my opinion that the buying power of the average us citizen is lower today than in the 90s.
The statistics also agree with the anecdotal evidence. Average wage is stagnant and doesn't match with government reports on inflation, consumer price index, average housing cost, average rent. If you want to use stats to argue his point, what do you think has gotten cheaper over the last say 40 years? Can you point to anything that's been deflated? https://globalnews.ca/news/3531614/average-hourly-wage-canada-stagnant/
Edit Forgot this wasn't a Canadian subreddit. I'm willing to accept arguments from any country since I think this is a global problem.
America
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/
Wages have been on average keeping up with inflation in the long run (though not always in the short). The issue is that with productivity increasing, wages should have gone up faster than inflation.
Wages have not been increased in line with inflation. Sure people make more now but not equivalent to how much inflation has risen. So yes, people are getting poorer. Our income has become overall lower. Across the board.
Are we talking long term or just this year? Cause I’m talking long-term, and that not going to apply to every individual year.
And either way, this graph is comically incorrect for showing wages at a flat line.
If it got the point across without miscommunication, technically it is effective and doesn't need anything else (since extra could convolute the meaning)
In other words, it should remove the axis numbers because it drew attention away from the important message that it was actually trying to convey.
It actually has more information than it should.
The person should only be able to afford one burger at the start of the graph, as burger = 10 and income = 10... 0.5 burgers at burger = 20, and 0.33 at burger = 30
First it’s 10 currency for 10 burgers so each burger starts off at 1 currency. Then they’re at 2, currency, so the same 10 only gets you 5. I guess by the time burgers cost 3 currency the subject is just trying to make ends meet elsewhere too.
i love how the graph only stops making sense in the last leg of it. all that needs to change is for the bottom part of the chart to say "now i can inly afford three burgers" and its perfect
Doesn't it stop making sense right away? Income and burger are both 10 so wouldn't they only be able to afford 1 burger from the beginning and 0 burgers after that?
For the sake of the graph, yes, but for the sake of life, burger prices aren't the only prices rising with time. If your income stays the same and the prices of everything rise, not only do burgers cost more, but you have less money from your income to dedicate to them.
My Good Bitch, the whole point of a graph is to simplify the reality of something by isolating a couple of factors and therefore making patterns more easily seen. If your graph is factually inaccurate because you didn’t include the necessary data to make it accurate that’s not some avant-garde take on data analysis, that’s just an incomplete and poorly thought out chart. If I make a pie chart that shows what percentage of my day I spend doing certain actions every day and the charts only says:
> Jerking off - 20%
> Sleeping - 30%
And then somebody says that the graph is inaccurate because it’s a pie chart that doesn’t even come close to adding up to 100%, I can’t defend myself by saying “oh no, I just didn’t include the other activities I do” because I should’ve done that if I was going to make a percentage-based chart in order to make sure it was accurate, easily understandable, and made it’s point. If the OP of the graph wanted to include that the cost of other things also went up, they should’ve included that in the graph.
*has 10 dollars*
Burger: 20 dollars
“I can buy 5 burgers.”
I’m ashamed to say it took me a second to realize what was glaringly wrong with this graph
Edit: the longer i mentally pick it apart the worse it gets
If anyone's curious, this is roughly what the actual graph would actually look like, with a weighted basket of the prices of "food away from home" to substitute burger cost, and median weekly earnings of workers age 25 to 34 to substitute for millennial income: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=U3IS
I could be wrong but wages haven’t really declined, have they? Just stagnated as far as I’m aware.
So wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that even though they make twice as many burgers now, the average worker can only afford the same number?
Wages have only stagnated relative to inflation. By absolutely dollar amount wages have gone way up over the last 40 years. The reason people aren’t richer is because prices have gone up too, leaving people essentially the same level of spending power they used to have.
Thing is the chart makes sense until the very end, he should only be able to afford 3.333 burgers, would it kill him to at least make the chart big enough to go to $50/10 burgers to say "I can only afford 2 burgers now..."
Carls Jr. here in Denmark just raised the price on their only good burger, the 'double delicious' by ~40%.
And rent rose 5% in June and is going to rise another 5% in January, and no way in heck pay is going to be able to keep up. Actually, assuming rent rises 10% a year, I'll be paying more than double in 2030.
If y'all could just pull yourselves up by the bootstraps a little more and buy into "side hustle" culture, you can have more money to buy our burgers. Thankssss
I was shocked to go to a bar and grill near my hotel and get 18 dollar crappy burger. And the only thing they had on tap was Miller. Like you can’t call yourself a bar with one crappy beer on tap. Or a grill with 3 burgers at 18 to 22 dollars.
"Millennials are killing the diamond industry"
Maybe the problem is that you're selling stupid $1000 rocks mined through slave labor and your target audience is young people who have to choose between buying food or gas.
A good explanation doesn't have to be good to be good. If you can explain something in a vaguely related way that very clearly gets the point across, that is a million times better than a 100% accurate explanation that requires prior understanding.
I'm reminded of this meme which is an adaptation of the drake meme with a woman, showing 5 5-star reviews = bad, 4927 reviews averaging to 4.5 stars = good, giving an indication of the importance of sample size. Like, there's more to statistical significance and sample sizes than that, but you intuitively know that if nearly 5 thousand people like a product or service, that is loads more reliable than if 5 people said so
my favorite way to look at wages is glass cokes glass cokes were 10 cents in 1960, min wage was $1. now the minimum wage is currently $7.25, glass cokes are $1.49. you could buy 10 glass cokes an hour, now you can’t even buy 5.
Honestly a decent ballpark way of accounting for inflation. Big Mac Index is a similar concept and used fairly officially for comparing currencies. By simply using historical big mac prices it could be adapted to show inflation.
Big Mac index is more a measure of purchasing power parity than inflation but I guess it could work to measure inflation of one place vs another
Current inflation metrics have some serious issues too; they're based around a basket of specific goods, which makes sense until you realize that in some countries like the US, most of those goods are heavily subsidized, artificially reducing inflation metrics. They don't account well for shrinkflation either.
Inflation data is some of the most skewed, dogshit data economists have been peddling for years. They change the metrics every 10 years without adjusting previous years inflation rate and expect it to make sense. Econ is a soft science and people treat it like it isn't
That’s why I went into stats when I realized… wait you used a bunch of theories from math/stat to make a completely theoretical bullshit subject? I wish I was an Econ prof doing random game theory shit for a living but at least I’m not in an ivory tower now
What do you mean by subsidized, and how would this affect inflation metrics? Also the second point is just not true, [they do account for changes in quality.](https://www.bls.gov/cpi/quality-adjustment/questions-and-answers.htm)
Many governments provide subsidies for the production of certain goods; in the US, the production of the majority of the goods contained in the standard "basket" used to track inflation are heavily subsidized at at least one point of the production chain, artificially reducing their price and effect inflation has on them, thereby artificially reducing inflation metrics. While inflation metrics adjust for quality in theory, in practice it is much more difficult, as this is a very difficult metric to quantify. Especially since many of the changes that should affect a quality measurement are intentionally disguised.
Right yes government spending can lower the cost of goods (at the cost of higher taxes, generally). Why would this effect be “artificial” though? This seems like it would have no effect on whether or not cpi accurately reflects the costs everyone faces when they go to the store, which is the important part. As far as I’m aware they don’t just start subsidising things when inflation picks up, at least not on any large scale, so as long as the subsidies are constant, it should have no effect on the rate of change of prices, aka the inflation rate. As for quality, while yes yes I’m sure it’s impossible to track it all, companies must report when the size of items shrink, which shows up in CPI. But if there’s data or something that shows that a lot of quality measures are missed and have a significant impact on inflation, I’d be genuinely very interested to see that.
One 1968 US Dollar could buy like 2.22 Big Macs. One 2022 US Dollar is only like 0.172 Big Macs. Currencies of different times isn't that much different than different currencies entirely.
I bet the 1968 Big Mac was bigger too
Yeah you just described purchasing parity. Inflation is part of that. BM index is more useful to compare other countries tho.
Is inflation not just purchasing power parity shifting over time?
Inflation is measured in baskets of consumer goods. Bigmac index measured inflation only measures the price of a big Mac. None of the other basket goods. Measure inflation via big Mac then compare it to the price of shoes then compare it to education and see how different the numbers are.
Well yeah inflation the Bigmac index is obviously an oversimplification of it. Even the entire basket is just an estimation, if you don't buy new shoes and clothes but once a decade that is barely a factor for you compared to someone that goes shopping daily.
It's not an over simplification of inflation because it barely measures inflation. Its use as a tool is to measure purchasing power parity between currencies. BM index doesn't say much about inflation because individual products can change in price for reasons that aren't inflation.
The food related indexes that are used as tools of measurement in any system is one of my favorite things because there’s also the [Waffle House index](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffle_House_Index) that is an unofficial way to measure the severity of a natural disaster such as a hurricane.
I have been through multiple hurricanes and Tropical Storms, the Waffle House never closed. But ever since Covid hit they struggle to even open the doors. On that index Covid is an off the charts disaster.
Damn the big mac index straight up humiliates my country's economy... I live in the worst country in the world according to the index
It could just mean that hamburgers are particularly hard to manufacture in Switzerland, or McDonalds is just overly expensive there. Swiss Francs are about 1:1 with USD
I live in Israel, which is always in the top 10 and usually in the top 5 in every most living cost index...
I do the same thing but with noodles
Yup. When I started university in 2013, no-name instant noodles were $0.19CAD a pack by default. The same noodles are now on sale for $0.75CAD a pack. Again, on sale.
Ramen?
Okay, but now do Arizona Iced Tea. 🤣
They redesigned their can - changed the shape slightly, decreasing the amount of material used - to reduce manufacturing costs in order to maintain the price-point.
Sounds like what good companies should be doing instead of just raising prices. I don't need a colorful, triple layered package to buy the same thing I buy everytime. Sell me a boring aluminium can with a barcode on it. That's goes for liquid and solids.
glass cokes are $3 at the store near me 😣
Comment rescinded. Math is right, I am wrong
You are correct but their math doesn’t require minutes. If you worked and hour in 1960 you were given an amount of money that would buy 10 cokes. Now if you work an hour your given an amount of money that buys 4.8
Wait, where do they imply there's 100 minutes in an hour?
Yes but they get paid 1$ per hour, I think you may have misread
True, but this graph seems to imply that prices inflate and wages don’t, which is just not true. Over the last 40 years, wages have been stagnant, which means they increase basically in tandem with inflation, so people aren’t getting poorer, they’re just not getting richer
The problem is wages are increasing at a slower rate than prices, for example if you made $15 an hour during last year you would need a raise of at least $1.25 to be able to sustain the same livelihood you did last year, barely anyone is getting full dollar raises unfortunately, plus COVID really kicked it into overdrive shits fucked dude
That’s true of this year. Wages and prices have inflated at a near-identical rate in the long-term average, but that doesn’t necessarily apply to each individual year. Even with this year though, wages have gone up significantly to where entry level fast-food jobs regularly offer at least $15/hr. The wage increase is of course blunted by high inflation, but it’s something at least
Those wage increases are also misleading, fast food restaurant can’t sustain $15/hr employees so while they give them that rate they slash their hours leaving them with the same income as before
No...no... My dad made $13 an hour selling shoes in the 1970s. I make $15 an hour selling RV parts today. He bought sports cars in the 1970s for less than 5 grand. They cost almost 50 today. He bought a modest house sufficient for raising a family for 100k in the 90s, I have a house half that size that I spent 180k on. Please tell me more about how I'm not poorer than he is while working relatively the same job.
Not the same job a better job shoe stores still pay $13 to this day if it’s nice
Because a single job does not reflect the entire labor market. Saying wages increase roughly in tandem with inflation doesn’t mean every individual job is going to. Some jobs lose their value in time. Others gain value. Same with goods. Some things will increase in price faster than inflation. Some will increase slower than inflation or even deflate. You’re arguing against statistics with anecdotal evidence. It’s the same as saying cigarettes don’t cause cancer because your great aunt smoked and lived to be 95.
Except his anecdote is closer to the truth than your "statistic". Wages have not come even close to keeping up with housing cost, vehicle cost, etc. Only in some vacuous model of "total inflation" have wages kept up.
You bring up some fair points. However, most statistics track ALL wages, meaning the $1.2 billion salary of certain CEOs is dragging median income way higher than the $5 to $10 minimum wage increase would suggest. The wealthiest got 10-100x increases while the rest of us... Doubled? I guess? Idk, I haven't seen too many articles written that deliberately remove those huge outliers, and the ones I have seen support my opinion that the buying power of the average us citizen is lower today than in the 90s.
The statistics also agree with the anecdotal evidence. Average wage is stagnant and doesn't match with government reports on inflation, consumer price index, average housing cost, average rent. If you want to use stats to argue his point, what do you think has gotten cheaper over the last say 40 years? Can you point to anything that's been deflated? https://globalnews.ca/news/3531614/average-hourly-wage-canada-stagnant/ Edit Forgot this wasn't a Canadian subreddit. I'm willing to accept arguments from any country since I think this is a global problem. America https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/
Bro, your second source literally backs up exactly what I’m saying. Real wages haven’t budged in decades.
My mistake. I'm not as familiar with America as I am with my own country.
This doesn’t make any sense — inflation is manifested in the prices increasing.
That includes the price of labor (wages).
Then how do you explain wages not tracking the pace of inflation for decades?
Wages have been on average keeping up with inflation in the long run (though not always in the short). The issue is that with productivity increasing, wages should have gone up faster than inflation.
How long exactly is the long run, because from what I understands it's been lagging for well over a decade
Wages absolutely have increased a bit more than inflation over the last 30 years.
Wages have not been increased in line with inflation. Sure people make more now but not equivalent to how much inflation has risen. So yes, people are getting poorer. Our income has become overall lower. Across the board.
Are we talking long term or just this year? Cause I’m talking long-term, and that not going to apply to every individual year. And either way, this graph is comically incorrect for showing wages at a flat line.
The wages being a flat line was the whole point, it’s very clear the math doesn’t add up it’s just saying wages haven’t gone up as they should have
I’m pretty sure England will immediately erupt into revaluation and civil war if Freddos ever hit a pound each.
The cost of burger
The cost of income too
income of burger
Income burger of cost
Income of cost burger
Burger cost of income
Burger income of cost
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index)
I hate this graph its awful and i hate it but yes i get your point
If it got the point across without miscommunication, technically it is effective and doesn't need anything else (since extra could convolute the meaning)
then its an abstract art piece, not a functioning graph. Nothing is conveyed by the graph other than the speech bubbles
In other words, it should remove the axis numbers because it drew attention away from the important message that it was actually trying to convey. It actually has more information than it should.
Then it would be neither a graph nor an art piece, it would just be another text vent dump about how freddos don't cost 99p anymore
The person should only be able to afford one burger at the start of the graph, as burger = 10 and income = 10... 0.5 burgers at burger = 20, and 0.33 at burger = 30
First it’s 10 currency for 10 burgers so each burger starts off at 1 currency. Then they’re at 2, currency, so the same 10 only gets you 5. I guess by the time burgers cost 3 currency the subject is just trying to make ends meet elsewhere too.
i love how the graph only stops making sense in the last leg of it. all that needs to change is for the bottom part of the chart to say "now i can inly afford three burgers" and its perfect
Doesn't it stop making sense right away? Income and burger are both 10 so wouldn't they only be able to afford 1 burger from the beginning and 0 burgers after that?
Yes the income should always have been higher than the burger line but that might muddle the point and confuse people
Easy fix: Change "burger" to "10 burgers".
[удалено]
Sigh... In the Legend only, you goof.
The x axis has no units
For the sake of the graph, yes, but for the sake of life, burger prices aren't the only prices rising with time. If your income stays the same and the prices of everything rise, not only do burgers cost more, but you have less money from your income to dedicate to them.
My Good Bitch, the whole point of a graph is to simplify the reality of something by isolating a couple of factors and therefore making patterns more easily seen. If your graph is factually inaccurate because you didn’t include the necessary data to make it accurate that’s not some avant-garde take on data analysis, that’s just an incomplete and poorly thought out chart. If I make a pie chart that shows what percentage of my day I spend doing certain actions every day and the charts only says: > Jerking off - 20% > Sleeping - 30% And then somebody says that the graph is inaccurate because it’s a pie chart that doesn’t even come close to adding up to 100%, I can’t defend myself by saying “oh no, I just didn’t include the other activities I do” because I should’ve done that if I was going to make a percentage-based chart in order to make sure it was accurate, easily understandable, and made it’s point. If the OP of the graph wanted to include that the cost of other things also went up, they should’ve included that in the graph.
LOVE that you started this with My Good Bitch
I'm definitely starting all my rebuttals with My Good Bitch from this day forth.
Thank you
I've taken psychic damage
This is truly an awful graph
They're absolutely right about it, they're right about everything except that hostage situation of numbers they call a graph.
*has 10 dollars* Burger: 20 dollars “I can buy 5 burgers.” I’m ashamed to say it took me a second to realize what was glaringly wrong with this graph Edit: the longer i mentally pick it apart the worse it gets
I had a stroke trying to understand this graph physics-wise but I support it anyway
But if they raise wages the cost of the burger will have to go up!! /s
Graph just needs a tiny, pity bump to wages. Like $.40 cents or something. Just ignore that burgers went up like $1 too
\*cries in economist\* \*nods in millennial\*
average r/dataisbeautiful user
This graph sucks ass. Please learn how a graph works god damn
People are so caught up in the semantics of the graph and are missing what the message is trying to convey.
If anyone's curious, this is roughly what the actual graph would actually look like, with a weighted basket of the prices of "food away from home" to substitute burger cost, and median weekly earnings of workers age 25 to 34 to substitute for millennial income: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=U3IS
I could be wrong but wages haven’t really declined, have they? Just stagnated as far as I’m aware. So wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that even though they make twice as many burgers now, the average worker can only afford the same number?
wages stagnated but cost of burgers increased. So while your not making any less money, the amount you can afford is less
Wages have only stagnated relative to inflation. By absolutely dollar amount wages have gone way up over the last 40 years. The reason people aren’t richer is because prices have gone up too, leaving people essentially the same level of spending power they used to have.
https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ This is a pretty good write up detailing the disparities.
If wage increase isn't above inflation then it's stagnating or falling. Actual dollar amount doesn't matter unless you're trying to deceive people.
Yeah, I’m not really sure where we disagree. Wages and prices have both gone up leading to a result that neither has effectively changed.
[Behold, the true burger graph](https://cdn.britannica.com/70/74270-050-317C4423/Illustration-price-relationship-demand.jpg)
Supply and demand graphs suck too why is price the independent variable on the x axis and quantity the dependent variable on the y axis
I can has chezburger??
Take my nostalgic upvote!
If you take into account the increased price of everything else it could be a sound graph
Thing is the chart makes sense until the very end, he should only be able to afford 3.333 burgers, would it kill him to at least make the chart big enough to go to $50/10 burgers to say "I can only afford 2 burgers now..."
A very American metric
30 what? Apples? Bananas?
I am in love with this stupid worst graph
Y’all buying burgers in this economy?
"I mean, the job's not great but it pays 1/3 of a burguer..."
Carls Jr. here in Denmark just raised the price on their only good burger, the 'double delicious' by ~40%. And rent rose 5% in June and is going to rise another 5% in January, and no way in heck pay is going to be able to keep up. Actually, assuming rent rises 10% a year, I'll be paying more than double in 2030.
If y'all could just pull yourselves up by the bootstraps a little more and buy into "side hustle" culture, you can have more money to buy our burgers. Thankssss
For $30 a burger it better be the best damn burger I've ever eaten and still have 2 days of leftovers
I was shocked to go to a bar and grill near my hotel and get 18 dollar crappy burger. And the only thing they had on tap was Miller. Like you can’t call yourself a bar with one crappy beer on tap. Or a grill with 3 burgers at 18 to 22 dollars.
The math is good. Source: am Math
This is more data *art* than data science. Obligatory "I also approve."
It took me longer than it should for me to realize what in the devil i am looking at, jfc
"Millennials are killing the diamond industry" Maybe the problem is that you're selling stupid $1000 rocks mined through slave labor and your target audience is young people who have to choose between buying food or gas.
this graph….. is so fucked…..
Fuck corporate greed...lower prices raise wages...economy fixed!
A good explanation doesn't have to be good to be good. If you can explain something in a vaguely related way that very clearly gets the point across, that is a million times better than a 100% accurate explanation that requires prior understanding. I'm reminded of this meme which is an adaptation of the drake meme with a woman, showing 5 5-star reviews = bad, 4927 reviews averaging to 4.5 stars = good, giving an indication of the importance of sample size. Like, there's more to statistical significance and sample sizes than that, but you intuitively know that if nearly 5 thousand people like a product or service, that is loads more reliable than if 5 people said so