One of the side-conversations that happened during yesterday's family event was with my oldest brother.
He was marveling that employers were offering entry-level jobs that required no special skills at $30 an hour and were not getting many job applications.
He remembers working for a lot less money than that. He also remembers when new employees started at a lower rate and then their wages increased with longevity.
Inflation
There are many "official" inflation values that are published. A common flaw in most of those published calculations is that they leave out "the volatile food, fuel and housing" costs.
It is commonly understood that the Fed has a "target" inflation level and they "print" money to hit that target. Their logic is that an expanding economy needs more money in circulation to support the increased number of economic transactions. 3% annual inflation is a commonly mentioned target.
If you divide the aforementioned $30/hr by the effects of the published rate of inflation, then a worker earning about $16.67/hr twenty years ago has the same buying power as somebody earning power as today's $30/hr (ignoring the effects of income taxes).
If you accept that the real loss of purchasing power is at least 6% after factoring in non-hedonistically* adjusted food costs, fuel and housing, then $9.40/hr provided the same purchasing power in 2006 that $30/hr does in 2026.
"Working your way up..."
My brother also mentioned his amazement that the "kids" entering the work-force feel that they are entitled to the highest pay-rate from the very first hour they work. "Back in the day" you had to be with a firm for five or ten years before you hit top-of-pay-scale.
I think that "pay me that now" attitude is due to the fact that employees no longer expect to work for the same firm their entire lives. Pensions only exist in the public sector so there is very little penalty to job-hopping. Since they only expect to be employed at the firm for three-to-ten years, there is expectation of being around to reap promises of better treatment in the future. Consequently, the pay-ramp of the past has no appeal to the transient workforce.
My brother isn't worried about his kids. They are in their forties and well-launched. He is worried about the world his three grand-daughters and one grand-son will have to navigate.
I also share his worries, but for different reasons. I like to think that my kids/grandkids will have a robust set of problem-solving tools in their toolbox. But what is going to bite them in the backside will be the accelerating overhang of debt. All of that "free stuff" that politicians are promising isn't free. It is purchased with borrowed money.
Historically, the only viable move for the government is to debase the currency and for firms to shrink-and-cheapen the goods and services they offer. First slowly. Then rapidly.
*"Hedonistic adjustments" are a slight of hand used by economists to make inflation look lower than it is. Suppose you eat a rib-eye steak in a decent restaurant every Friday. As prices go up and your paycheck doesn't, then most buyers stairstep downward in their choices. They buy a cheaper steak, they start eating at less expensive restaurants, eventually they are eating Bar-S hotdogs and then they are eating a can of beans at home. The economists don't count that as inflation because the buyer is getting the same amount of protein and their enjoyment stays the same.
































