29.01.2015 Views

1fAWAwx

1fAWAwx

1fAWAwx

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 5-3<br />

Growth in Productivity and Average Wage, 1947–2013<br />

Index, 1947=100 (log scale)<br />

500<br />

400<br />

2013<br />

300<br />

Real Output<br />

Per Hour<br />

200<br />

Real Average Wage<br />

(output deflator)<br />

100<br />

Real Average Wage<br />

(CPI deflator)<br />

75<br />

1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005<br />

Note: Real output per hour is for all workers in the nonfarm business sector. Average wage is for private production and<br />

nonsupervisory workers. Output deflator is the price index for nonfarm business output. CPI deflator is the CPI-W.<br />

Data on wages before 1964 reflects SIC-based industry classifications.<br />

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Productivity and Costs, Current Employment Statistics; CEA calculations.<br />

incomes for the top 1 percent of households have increased by around 200<br />

percent.10<br />

Technological Change and Inequality<br />

The lesson from Figure 5-3 is that productivity growth is important<br />

for wage growth, but that does not mean that it automatically leads to wage<br />

growth. One possibility is that the sources of labor productivity and MFP<br />

growth since the early 1970s are qualitatively different than earlier, and that<br />

these different sources of growth drove the trends in inequality over the last<br />

40 years. In the early 1990s, a broad consensus emerged among economists<br />

that an increase in the demand for skill relative to the supply of educated<br />

labor was the primary driver of the sharp rise in inequality in the 1980s<br />

(Bound and Johnson 1995; Katz and Murphy 1992; and Juhn, Murphy,<br />

and Pierce 1993). It soon became accepted that “skill-biased technological<br />

change” (SBTC) was the most important cause of increased inequality<br />

(Berman, Bound, and Griliches 1994; Krueger 1993). The crux of the argument<br />

is that, as computer technology became increasingly less expensive,<br />

relative demand increased for workers with complementary skills. This<br />

explanation has remained popular among economists with few modifications<br />

to the basic argument until recently (for example, Acemoglu 2002).<br />

10 The CBO notes that it chose 1979 and 2007 as points of comparison because there are<br />

cyclical fluctuations in inequality measures and both years are business cycle peaks.<br />

190 | Chapter 5

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!