The number 0 still exists. The chart does show arbitrary values higher and lower than the line. Choosing a lower limit other than 0 is a dishonest choice. It’s the first lesson I taught kids about when I touched on media literacy. Ask yourself why the author chose the mode they used and any arbitrary choices they made.
$30 of increase since the 1980s is entirely are up by problems in how we measure CPI. Even the understatement in housing alone would eat up that “increase.”
Removed by mod
How would that chart look if the y-axis started at 0?
Much flatter… 310-390 as opposed to what’s ostensibly a 10-90 scale visually.
Removed by mod
The number 0 still exists. The chart does show arbitrary values higher and lower than the line. Choosing a lower limit other than 0 is a dishonest choice. It’s the first lesson I taught kids about when I touched on media literacy. Ask yourself why the author chose the mode they used and any arbitrary choices they made.
That’s not the point–because the y-axis doesn’t start at zero, the changes in wages look more drastic than they actually are.
Removed by mod
$30 of increase since the 1980s is entirely are up by problems in how we measure CPI. Even the understatement in housing alone would eat up that “increase.”
Removed by mod
Systemic problems in how we measure “real” dollars have probably outpaced $30 in that timeframe.