Your detailed writeup of the AS appendix is a real service! Do you think it's fair to say that AS represents the lower-bound of income concentration estimates, and that PSZ represents the upper bound? My priors (biases?) nudge me a little closer to the AS conclusions, but it feels hard to say which is better due to the complexity of the data.
Two other thoughts: I read their household adjustments as 1) equivalizing without re-sorting, so some of the original top 1% have less equivalized income than units below them, and 2) re-ranking units by equivalized income. It didn't seem to me like they ever applied incomes to individuals rather than tax units.
Second, my higher-level takeaway is that we shouldn't think about wage/household or pre/post-fisc inequality in either-or terms. Obviously, higher wage/pre-fisc inequality will lead to higher household/post-fisc inequality. But, given how households' patterns of employment have changed due to gendered trends of labor force participation since the 1960s, individual workers', and families', dependence on employment is different than before.
It's great to hear from you! Hmm...you might be right - perhaps I got a bit spun around between individual / adult / household / tax unit. I'm going to look again and will add a correction above as needed (mentioning you!). Regardless, I find it quite strange that upwards 1/2 of the top 1%'s market income share hinges on the definition of individual or tax unit.
I admit that my priors (biases) were to somewhat thoughtlessly buy into the PSZ trends. I'm much more sympathetic towards the AS argument that PSZ produced a worst case scenario picture. But I have a very hard time accepting the AS conclusion as is.
Re. your second point - that makes total sense. Really nicely stated. It's a both-and situation, there needs to be a focus on pre-fisc via. something like worker voice / labor movement and post-fisc - a policy system that ensures a decent standard of living.
So useful. Thanks for this analysis which really helps us lay readers see the complexity and also adjust our reactions to headlines.
Thanks so much for the kind words! I'm glad to hear that it was useful for you.
Your detailed writeup of the AS appendix is a real service! Do you think it's fair to say that AS represents the lower-bound of income concentration estimates, and that PSZ represents the upper bound? My priors (biases?) nudge me a little closer to the AS conclusions, but it feels hard to say which is better due to the complexity of the data.
Two other thoughts: I read their household adjustments as 1) equivalizing without re-sorting, so some of the original top 1% have less equivalized income than units below them, and 2) re-ranking units by equivalized income. It didn't seem to me like they ever applied incomes to individuals rather than tax units.
Second, my higher-level takeaway is that we shouldn't think about wage/household or pre/post-fisc inequality in either-or terms. Obviously, higher wage/pre-fisc inequality will lead to higher household/post-fisc inequality. But, given how households' patterns of employment have changed due to gendered trends of labor force participation since the 1960s, individual workers', and families', dependence on employment is different than before.
Hi Chalem,
It's great to hear from you! Hmm...you might be right - perhaps I got a bit spun around between individual / adult / household / tax unit. I'm going to look again and will add a correction above as needed (mentioning you!). Regardless, I find it quite strange that upwards 1/2 of the top 1%'s market income share hinges on the definition of individual or tax unit.
I admit that my priors (biases) were to somewhat thoughtlessly buy into the PSZ trends. I'm much more sympathetic towards the AS argument that PSZ produced a worst case scenario picture. But I have a very hard time accepting the AS conclusion as is.
Re. your second point - that makes total sense. Really nicely stated. It's a both-and situation, there needs to be a focus on pre-fisc via. something like worker voice / labor movement and post-fisc - a policy system that ensures a decent standard of living.