Wage inequality may be starting to reverse

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.ph&#x2F;kzt4e" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.ph&#x2F;kzt4e</a>

I’m incredibly happy to see wages at the bottom rising, but I think there’s a serious lack of discussion around obscenely high executive pay.

The country is being flooded with as many low skilled workers as can be bothered to make the trek, and has been for quite a long time. This problem will never see change for the positive until the ruling class no longer benefits from cheap labor. Don&#x27;t forget it was them who caused this on purpose to begin with starting in the 1960s with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.

I’m skeptical of the premise of this article, but I know that I saw an A&amp;W advertising CAD $17&#x2F;hr starting wage today. Not only is that above minimum wage but they are advertising it out front. Down the street is a factory asking for electricians at $40&#x2F;hr. I hope that publishing wages&#x2F;salaries becomes more normal. I think it’s an equalizer.

Wages or income? Two different things. Steve Jobs had a $1 salary, many notable others did, too [1].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;One-dollar_salary" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;One-dollar_salary</a>

There are so many ways in which this article really puts on display the purpose of the WSJ it’s hard to count. The most important ones are<p>1) labor organization (unions) are responsible for the meager gains. That’s it. If higher wage earners (like me!) actually engaged with society and organized their trade we’d get the same gains<p>2) inequality is not earnestly, meaningfully defined as the difference between compensation for types of labor: it’s the difference between the equity in society held by the workers versus the owning class.<p>this is borderline propaganda

&gt; In the decades before the pandemic, the wages of lower-paid, less skilled hourly employees steadily lost ground to those of skilled workers, college graduates, managers and professionals. In the two years since, those trends have sharply reversed.<p>We don’t know if this narrowing in inequality will last.<p>I&#x27;m certainly for economic justice. But how is comparing apples to canned tuna &quot;inequality&quot;?<p>As another comment already mentioned, wouldn&#x27;t our time be better spent discussing the extreme delta between the top and everyone else? The delta between service worker and say tech is far less than the delta between that collective average and the top of the financial food chain.<p>But here we got again. Distracted. And letting the lede tip toe out of the room.

Ultra-rich usually do not receive high wages, but they pocketed around 20T(my estimation) in last 5 years through leveraged trades on inflated stocks&#x2F;private equities and real estate enjoying near zero loans rates.<p>Now they own very large chunk of American businesses and land&#x2F;real estate, no need to work for wages.

&gt; Remote work, deglobalization, stalled technology have started eroding some advantages of higher-skilled workers<p>Their premise is broken. The largest inequality is not between highly skilled workers and everyone else. It is between the wealthy (top 0.1% or 0.01%) and the rest.

no reason to clutch your pearls fellow bougies, the fed will fix it

I&#x27;m sure I&#x27;m not the only one not believing in this.

The premise of this article is absolutely disgusting. The inequality that matters isn&#x27;t the difference between blue collar workers and college grads with marketing and tech jobs. This is just propaganda to destroy the middle class.