Flawed WSJ Editorial: Wages Are a Price, Too

Economics Professor Mark Perry has an interesting post about an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal called Inflation May Be Worse Than We Think that includes this graph:

Wsj

As Perry points out, this graph makes a serious error:

David Ranson is way off-base on his inflation analysis and has made a serious and fundamental error: he has assumed that income remains constant for 30 years and all other prices increase annually by 4%. That's pure nonsense and nitwitery.

Reason? Wages are just another price, the price of labor. And inflation affects all prices, including wages, see chart below:

Cpi

Oops! Nitwitery indeed. ("Nitwitery" … a new economics term to add to my vocabulary.)


Comments

3 responses to “Flawed WSJ Editorial: Wages Are a Price, Too”

  1. Good point, however, if we’re talking about purchasing power, then $100,000 dollars doesn’t buy as much as it did 30 years ago.
    Of course people get cost of living raises, but if you were making $100,000 dollars and got a 2% cost of living raise, you’d be making more than $100,000 dollars–so you could no longer use $100,000 as your benchmark. And if inflation was 4% you still wouldn’t be keeping up.

  2. All very true. The error made in this article is to assume someone’s compensation stays at a constant dollar amount while everything else incresases in cost. Most people get repeated raises and cost of living incresases as the progress over a thirty year period. It dosen’t fit with the narrative of the story he is telling.

  3. BTW, Kathy. I checked out your blog. My wife is an ISU grad class of ’79. I knew there was something I liked about you. 🙂

Leave a Reply to Michael W. KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading