Catherine Rampell of The New York Times has posted results from a UK think tank tracking trends in overall economic growth and median pay from 2000 to 2007 in 10 countries. As Rampell explains:
A higher ratio means that the pace of growth for median pay was close to the pace of growth for output per capita. A low ratio means that median pay grew much more slowly than did the economy as a whole.
Catherine Rampell of The New York Times has posted results from a UK think tank tracking trends in overall economic growth and median pay from 2000 to 2007 in 10 countries. As Rampell explains:
A higher ratio means that the pace of growth for median pay was close to the pace of growth for output per capita. A low ratio means that median pay grew much more slowly than did the economy as a whole.
Of the 10 countries analyzed, Finland showed the closest relationship between the living standards of the typical worker and improvements in the overall economy.
The United States was on the lower end. From 2000 to 2007, median pay increased at a quarter of the pace of output per capita. In other words, the typical American worker did not share much in the country’s growing wealth even when the economy was good.
Below I reproduce the figure Rampell posted but with Pennsylvania data added in. When the economy was strongest here in Pennsylvania, wages for the typical Pennsylvania worker grew at a quarter of the pace of output per capita in the state. When it comes to trends in inequality, Pennsylvania is America.
