If they are, why haven't you cited the text than answers them?
Trump/Russia Tax Cut results in lower wages for most workers
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
If they are, why haven't you cited the text than answers them?
Is that a fact?
Because I don't feed sea-lions.
Think so?
What does that have to do with your failure to answer the questions I asked?
- Are you claiming that everyone who responds to a poll is truthful?
- What questions were they asked?
- What was the survey sample size?
- What were the demographic breakdowns?
I have no idea what you are doing. I suspect that you don't either.
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
With inflation, the numbers are much worse. They do have a graph showing the sharp drop this past quarter when adjusted for inflation, and the Real Wage Index looks like this:
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
- Are you claiming that everyone who responds to a poll is truthful?
They would have to purposfully be trying to game the PayScale index, which is unlikely, since the information submitted is for employees to compare their salaries to the market. - What questions were they asked?
They ask what level of college you completed, your current payrate, years of experience, location, male vs female, military experience, and a whole host of other data points, but those are the ones that stood out to me - What was the survey sample size?
It's current trend data from user input of over 35 million employee profiles - What were the demographic breakdowns?
There are over 250 compensable factors, some are listed above - What's a "Trump/Russia tax cut"?
Assuming he means the tax cuts implemented at the beginning of the year.
According to them?
Is there evidence of a causative effect between tax cuts and depressed wages, or not?
Looks like a lot of presuming and assuming.
Can you quote the questions PayScale is supposed to have asked and the poll demographics and sample size, and methodology with the relevant link?
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
You can see the questions here: https://www.payscale.com/my/survey?start&tk=indexx_methodology
With 35 Million employee profiles, to move the index down .9%, there would HAVE to be a lot of assuming to think that the information gathered is being played with. .9% is equal to 315,000 people adjusting their wages to 0 on purpose to game the index. That calculation doesnt factor in those who would be being honest while adjusting thier payrate, which, if it were actually increasing, would mean you would need more than just the 315K. You would have to be reaching hard to assume that the data was gamed by those taking the survey, or that those that would had a significant impact.
That wasn't what was promised.
What was promised was that workers would see at least a $4,000 pay increase.
The average increase is about $300.
Is $300 = $4000 in Conservatardia?
Yes. According to polling, most Americans did not see an increase in their checks.
You don't know what those words mean, do you?
Still relying on polling whose methodologies you don't seem able to explain and about which you appear unable to answer a few questions?
Is that what you presume, or is it what you assume?
The methodologies were explained, and your gaslight attempt failed.
You're just stalling again.
So you presume, or so you assume?
They were? Cite the post.
BTW,
- Are you claiming that everyone who responds to a poll is truthful?
- What questions were they asked?
- What was the survey sample size?
- What were the demographic breakdowns?
- What's a "Trump/Russia tax cut"?
Right here, you sea-lion.
Why are you even posting now? You're doing more damage to your brand.