tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2145276355440422221.post8750634856244884845..comments2015-04-09T11:38:22.805-04:00Comments on Cancel Infinity: “Mumbo-Jumbo” Mumbo-JumboViscid Konradhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02958267196850219430noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2145276355440422221.post-41109846474886930172015-04-09T11:38:22.805-04:002015-04-09T11:38:22.805-04:00That is correct. My graph does not compare Piketty...That is correct. My graph does not compare Piketty and Saez with CBO; nor did I claim that it did. There are multiple issues at hand, and the first is whether or not "[t]he average income for the bottom 90% is not a decent proxy for the median" as you asserted. To resolve this issue, I considered data from a single CBO report. It seems clear that for purposes of evaluating income growth, the two measures are practically interchangeable.Viscid Konradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02958267196850219430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2145276355440422221.post-87149943158505685582015-03-13T19:41:34.631-04:002015-03-13T19:41:34.631-04:00Your graph does NOT compare the Piketty & Saez...Your graph does NOT compare the Piketty & Saez estimate of mean incomes of the bottom 90% of "tax units" with CBO estimates of median income of households. My graph does http://www.cato.org/blog/bottom-90-pretax-pretransfer-income-no-proxy-median-after-tax-income<br /><br />Newspapers hate graphs, but the relevant data were in my article. Alan Reynoldshttp://www.cato.org/people/alan-reynoldsnoreply@blogger.com