Replies

Southack post #50 No, real wages in the U.S. have steadily increased even after inflation.

Southack post #167 Did "real" U.S. wages go up or down?"

Then you affirmed your selection of hourly real wage data in:

Southack post #164 Yes, the point of contention was whether hourly *wages* had risen or fallen, after all. And your source shows an inflation-adjusted *gain* in U.S. wages.

And I asked you in my post #168 to be specific about "inflation adjusted wages" - to which you never replied.

But now I'm supposed to believe that unadjusted wages are your preferred metric.

Southack post #241 No, my preferred metric is non-adjusted, flat U.S. Dollar wages.

(those last would be called nominal or current dollar wages)

Regardless, you have no credibility at this point. Let's face it. You don't know what your position is or was. You've changed it repeatedly to deflect scrutiny of your weak argument.

Each of you wants to somehow find some arcane calculation by which you can show that Americans get poorer and poorer each year.

I'm using the same 'arcane' data you used, just graphed, no calculations.

You probably don't even realize that what you are trying to do is to promote and advance Marxism,

And now the Marxist straw-man argument. I accept your ad-hominem attack as your concesssion.

"But now I'm supposed to believe that unadjusted wages are your preferred metric."

Yes. Your logical flaw was in making an assumption without asking for clarification. You assumed that simply because I was humoring some posters by using *their* preferred metric that it was *my* preferred metric.

Had you simply asked, I would have set you straight from moment one.

Instead, you continue to make bizarre assumptions and draw ridiculous conclusions as if your new goal has become to find some semantic or pedantic rhetorical flaw in my posted words rather than flesh out facts and broad concepts in the topic for this thread as well as in the underlying anti-capitalist undercurrents of said topic.

"Regardless, you have no credibility at this point. Let's face it. You don't know what your position is or was. You've changed it repeatedly to deflect scrutiny of your weak argument."

Rubbish. My *position* has remained the same all along: Marx is wrong. Capitalistic socieities do *not* progressively impoverish themselves year after year. Showing that U.S. wages have INCREASED is merely one of many *methods* to support my position above.

There is no change at all in my above position, much as you would wish it to so be. Your additional ramblings are similarly flawed, as well.

You probably don't even realize that what you are trying to do is to promote and advance Marxism

"And now the Marxist straw-man argument. I accept your ad-hominem attack as your concesssion."

How sad. You don't even understand that which is truly a straw man argument or not.

A "straw man" argument is one in which you set up a position that is easily topled over.

NEWSFLASH: debunking Marxism is hardly something that is easily toppled over. I've posted U.S. government wage data, Marx's own words, and substantial evidence of wealth accumulation by Americans in order to show that Marx was wrong. That's no straw man. Q.E.D.