@MarxoidNess@_Credible_Hulk Super dishonest use of the graph. You’re selecting a group and measuring across two different methods BLS used to collect data. The same graph with only the updated method shows a consistent 30% uptick
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk Who said it was a bad thing? I said that’s why the graph has the shape lol. You said I was wrong and just kept asking “why” when I gave u a reason. I gave u a full summary and now “uhh that’s a good thing duhh”. No one asked that
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk You’re arguing just to argue. What was the reason I said it increased so much 2001? When before that did anything increase while participation decreased? This is why I said u can’t read your own graph. Why even measure participation? Measure women’s median personal income.
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk Personal income increase? Well the median woman made a lot more money. And companies also started adding benefits that come with full time labor that add on to the personal income number. That’s the large majority of the reason for the rapid growth. Tax cuts were unrelated
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk That way in capitalism. I gave you a mechanism that’s well supported. Take Claudia Goldin as an anchor for my position. Moving from temporary, low-skill labor, to more workers, working more full-time, high-skill labor completely transforms the workplace. So why did real median
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk So in your graph of women labor participation,what happens in 1980-2000? Then compare that to my original claim and come back.
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk What specifically would change your mind? Proof of what exactly? Your graphs were evidence of my point that women worked more over time. You can’t read graphs and you haven’t given dispositive evidence. Like how much do I have to teach you or have you read before u stop?
@jakeesebbens@_Credible_Hulk With a character limit? My note was basically as accurate as you coulda got. The graphs were the most relevant proof. I’m not gonna sit here and go back and forth with a wall, either you believe me or you don’t. I recommend reading some scholarship on the topic.
@_Credible_Hulk This was still under gold standard de jure. The quote was actually fine for the time but a country’s economics usually changes after 100 years. Idk wtf they were trying to say honestly