1. That wages in Jorgensen's model are net of taxes and
2. That Jorgenson did not model individual wage behavior as the economy grows over time.
That means, take home pay initally is constant, but over time it's not possible to tell whether individual wages grow at the same rate as aggregate wages.
Those of you out there who are interested can read it for yourselves here in posts 232 thru 235.
What I originally posted to you was a comment relating to your claim that Jorgenson eas saying that wages must fall when I said:
"You fall prey to what others have done in claiming that the economist Jorgenson has claimed wages must fall. He did not despite all the opponents' claims that he did so. That's not what his study showed and you even agreed with that assessment with ancient_geezer in earlier postings. Are you now wishing to take back what you said to him? Sort of like putting the Genie back in the bottle isn't it?"
I made no comment at all regarding the wages in the initial base case of the model which is where the economist ASSUMED they would fall. My comment related to your statement that Jorgenson was saying wages would fall ... which clearly he did not say and which you agreed with ancient_geezer that he did not say. The pertinent post numbers you gave were actually #234 and #235. Using #232 as you attempt is merely you "wriggle" effort. Why not just admit your error and move on?