Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Wage stagnation has remained a persistent problem since 2008.
|
No, it's much older than that.
Quote:
|
And labor participation is not explained by boomer retirements.
|
It mostly is. As we've discussed, prime age participation is slightly below the pre-recession peak and roughly inline with mid-1990s normal. Yes, that's still below the late-1990s peak and even the pre-2001 recession peak. Problem just isn't as big as you think it is.
No, that's the numbers talking.
Quote:
|
Consider how many retirees don’t have enough to quit, and remain in the workforce.
|
They can't both be still working and not in the labor force.
Quote:
|
This tech thing’s been with us for a few decades now.
|
It began in the 1970s. Every measured prime age labor force participation that was higher than today's was after the age of automation began.
You're looking at a Solow world and seeing Malthus.
Quote:
|
ETA: Each recovery since 1990 has been categorized as jobless.
|
No, that's not right. And if you're trying to argue that the labor market is bleak relative to all of the 20th Century and not just relative to the late 1990s boom, you're even more wrong.
