(scary, isn't it ;-)
As for wage direction over time, I believe there is too much aggregation in Jorgenson's simulation to make any specific predictions. Though there is high aggregate growth, one of his observations is a large increase in labor supply as workers trade leisure for work. A large increase in the labor supply would tend to have a depressive effect on wages ... at least initially.
All in all, there is little to be gained for attempting to glean such information from this study, since there appears to be no indication wage dynamics were modeled.
All in all, there is little to be gained for attempting to glean such information from this study, since there appears to be no indication wage dynamics were modeled.
The you hit the nub of it, not even Jorgenson has quantified what wages would do in any of his models as an output.
The best we can infer from his models is that given the GDP & investment growth generated by the model, the purchasing power of the household in terms of investment and consumption levels must increase overall. Jorgenson's models show an initial decline in consumption with large growth in investment, consumption catches up and surpasses the base income tax case within two years and investment increases moderate as time advances.
Overall the net I see is strongly positive, especially when one notes his models only implements tax change per-se, and apparently does not take the additional step of trying to estimate the gains from reduction of business overhead costs related to the current tax system. At least none where I have been able to find in the IGEM description or in anything he has stated in his implementations.