Cavuto falsely claimed real wages have increased
SUMMARY: In a discussion with Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) regarding income disparity in the United States, Fox News' Neil Cavuto repeatedly claimed that real wages for American workers have increased. In fact, as Frank pointed out, real wages declined in each of the past two years.
On the February 21 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, during a discussion with Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on income disparity in the United States, host Neil Cavuto repeatedly stated, falsely, that real wages -- wages adjusted for inflation -- have increased for American workers. In fact, they have declined each of the past two years.
Cavuto claimed real wages have risen "3.3 percent." Although it is unclear where Cavuto derived this figure, a January 31 Department of Labor release reported a real wage decline of 0.9 percent for private industry workers and a decline of 0.3 percent for state and local government workers during 2005.
Further, as The New York Times has noted, this makes the first consecutive year-to-year decline in real wages for private employees since 1990; in 2004, real wages declined 0.8 percent for private industry workers and 1.1 percent for state and local government workers.
From the February 21 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
CAVUTO: But would you argue, sir -- and I wish we had more time -- that, with a 4.7 percent unemployment, housing starts booming, factory production up, real wages, adjusted for inflation, also up, that it's not as bad --
FRANK: No, they're not.
CAVUTO: -- as you say?
FRANK: That's wrong. No, that's wrong. Real wages are not up. Real wages have stagnated. Real wages, taking inflation into account, at least -- and the Federal Reserve will tell you this -- have essentially stagnated.
CAVUTO: Last year, they were up --
FRANK: And it's what [former Federal Reserve chairman] Alan Greenspan said.
[crosstalk]
CAVUTO: Last year, they were up 3.3 percent, adjusted for inflation.
FRANK: No, not real wages. You are simply wrong, Neil. Real wages -- now --
CAVUTO: No. No.
FRANK: By the way, if you take --
CAVUTO: I'm saying, after inflation, sir, 3.3 percent.
FRANK: No. Well, we just differ. And I -- that is simply -- I think you are factually incorrect. Real wages -- nominal wages may have gone up that way, the dollars. But real wages means, when you take away inflation, they have been stagnant.
Stayed at a B&B, and the owners seem to like Faux. All sets tuned to Faux when we arrived. It is always a test to see how long I can stomach misinformation, but I did manage to watch Fox and Friends for about 1/2 hour. It was easy to pick apart the opinion vs news, and I was also able to pick a few lies out of the banter.
How can a network get away with so much misinformation? Without a bright Mr Frank, how would the average Faux viewer know the truth.
"Cavuto claimed real wages have risen "3.3 percent." Although it is unclear where Cavuto derived this figure..." --MMFA
-----------------------------------------------
MMFA has my respect for not speculating where Cavuto really got that figure. Speculation like that heads straight for the gutter.
I've had my posts removed because I referred to right-wing sources as databases that reside in their intestinal tracts.
You can't come close to refering to the RDB anymore. Some people just have no sense of humor.
I wonder whose constitution is so feeble they can't take it?
I don't know about real wages country wide, but I do know real government spending has gone up (as it does almost continually) by a factor greater than the combination of inflation and population growth.
with bush and the republicans leading the charge. bush can't manage to veto any of these bloated spending bills but he can do his first veto to make sure his pals get their foot in our ports.
I don't know about real wages country wide...
In other words, when Cavuto goes on the air and LIES, that plants enough doubt in your mind to be able to say, "Well, I don't know what the truth is!" Even when the truth is so obvious.
Oscar, if Neil Cavuto told you that the moon is NOT made of green cheese, and I told you it was, would you then say, "Well, I don't know if the moon is made of green cheese or not"?
Of course you wouldn't - you'd say: "Niel's right; Ellington's wrong. I am intelligent enough to know that even though there are two sides presented in an argument, each side does not always have to have equal merit."
Why won't you do that here? Why won't you say: "Cavuto is wrong; Frank is right."
Why won't you do that?
My family income has gone up substantially above inflation the last couple of years, however if you factor in those willing to work for below prevailing wages for an area (read illegals, if you will), then incomes probably haven't kept up. In that the Caveman(Cavuto) is wrong with his figures. I'm not an economist by trade, so I don't know the real answer, even after reading the accompying article. You see, I believe there are lies, damn lies and statistics and a good economist can twist any figures until they say what he wants them to say. Caveman is wrong, but is the other analysis right?
Sure statistics can be selectively quoted or time periods can be shifted, there are many ways to manipulate statistics.
We all know this. The problem is that Cavuto is being specific here. He is saying that the real wage growth, adjusted for inflation was 3.3% last year. Does anyone besides the Department of Labor put out these statistics, because I am not aware of it. The DOL data directly contradict Cavuto. Read it for yourself. The link is there.
This is a binary situation. Cavuto is simply wrong.
Caveman's stats were wrong, based on real dollars. Anybody that can read can see that. However, that doesn't automatically make BOL facts right. Remember this is a R controlled government, and according to most here, everything that comes from any dept under their control is an outright lie. I have seen various figures for inflation rates, enough to know the books can be "cooked." The only thing any of us knows for sure is a product of our personal experience. From my personal experience, my household is ahead of inflation for the last couple of years, primarily due to hard work. That can and will change over time, sometimes we win, sometimes we lose.
I misread your post. You were saying Cavuto was wrong.
On the issue of labor statistics. You will usually hear complaints from liberals about the current government when they are caught changing formulae, presumably to get a better result. I am not aware of this happening at the Dept. of Labor or any of their statistical measurements.
Maybe I am just naive, but my understanding of the statistics in question is that the formulae are pretty straightforward and the results are deterministic.
From my limited understanding, it is hard and probably pointless for the administration to cook those kinds of minor statistics. The current administration likes to play those kind of games with big things like projected budget deficits and projected costs of things like wars and medicare programs.
has not "cooked the books", but I (or probably any of us) knows for sure the methodology of BOL. If they factor in the lower paying service jobs that are replacing the lost manufacturing jobs, for example, real "average" wages may go down, even though most people got substantial raises in their individual industries. We can easily agree Caveman was wrong, even though I, for one, do not agree with the BOL figures at least as related to the industry I'm in. I think MMFA was correct in pointing out Caveman's error, but to use the BOL figures without some caveat would lead everyone to think everybody "lost" purchasing power and that may not be true in reality. As baby boomers retire in greater numbers over the next several years, we may continue to see "real" wages go down as those higher incomes are replaced by entry level positions (Companies are getting leaner and meaner in their hiring, promotion practices).
Guys, guys , guys... you took Cavuto out of context again. What he really meant to say is Corporate CEO's have had a 333% increase in their real wages in the past year! Granted, he may of low balled it a little but give him a break.
The Democrats, progressives, and independents need to stop going on Fox. Period.
Why give Fox any legitimacy? Do you think Covuto is going to check his statistic and correct his statement? At best, and even doubtful, he'll say he was misinterpreted or he'll twist the interpretation of his statistic.
You don't get the Fox format. They bring democrats on as purposeful foils. They always bring on a middle of the road democrat who will agree with the fox host bashing the democrat of the moment as to a particular issue while saying that not all democrats are bad. The format is down pat.
BTW-Is cavuto fruitiest right winger on TV or is it Carl Cameron?
Democrats and progressives cannot stop going on Fox News because that allows them to define who are democratic or progressive. They'll still have on 'Democrats' and 'progressives' which will be hand-picked straw men for their own use. In fact that's exactly what appears to be happening. I can't remember the last serious figure on the left that actually went on a Fox News show. It's really a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. No matter what happens they produce their image of people on the left as they please.
OSCAR-THE-FOREST-GUMP takes pride in his ignorance when he says,
"I'm not an economist by trade, so I don't know the real answer, even after reading the accompying article. You see, I believe there are lies, damn lies and statistics and a good economist can twist any figures until they say what he wants them to say. Caveman is wrong, but is the other analysis right?"
Yes, isn't it amazing how Bush and his fellow conservatives take pride in their ignorance????????
Unfortunately, ignorance here equals strength of conviction.
MACDADDY, YOUARE SO RIGHT!REAGAN AND BOTH BUSHES -WAHT IS A BILLIONAIRE NOT TO LIKE ABOUT THEM?
Ever since Fox started spewing its poison into the airwaves it seems that accuracy in reporting is as quaint as the Geneva Conventions, or that useless 4th Amendment. What happened to journalistic integrity? I know some of you will contend that everyone knows Fox is just an "entertainment" network, that no one takes them seriously. Well, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, interviews Dick Cheney with the insight of a duck, it must be a duck. Fox is a NEWS network, and they should be required to adhere to the integrity of one. No excuses. Either clean up their act or have a disclaimer at the bottom, or a laugh track. They could try a studio audience like "The Daily Show" but I doubt anyone would laugh. Cry, yes. Laugh, no.
West1 is correct; Democrats, progressives and centrists should just stop going on Fox period. They all should know by now that they are nothing but foils for Fox's talking heads and, in appearing, they allow Fox to claim to be "fair and balanced" while being ridiculed in front of Fox's audience.
Most of Fox's core audience are NEVER going to believe any kind of reasoned argument or FACT given to counter any of the latest RNC talking points so why bother. Just let them be what they are - the Republican's "Ministry of Truth" and do not dignify their pretense at being a legitimate news source.
Give MMFA credit for getting the substance of the claim right..Cavuto cited % change in hourly earnings in current dollars (i.e. not real wages, but nominal wages) which were up 3.3% from Jan 2005 to Jan 2006. So Cavuto was using wrong description or wrong number (however you look at it). What I do find funny is the following
"Although it is unclear where Cavuto derived this figure,"
1. Go to BLS website 2. Look for Real Earnings 3. Click on Table 1 4. Look at row in table
Industry | | | | Percent | Jan. | Dec. | Jan. | change: | 2005 | 2005p | 2006p | Jan. 2005- | | | | Jan. 2006 Total private:(2) Current dollars..........| $15.99 | $16.36 | $16.52 | 3.3
MMFA: Analyzing a wrong statistic: A+ Research Ability: D-
Proving MMFA was right in the first place, but still not man enough to totally admit it.
But I just found it funny that they couldn't find this 3.3% increase...because on every other article they usually document where the false claim or misleading claim/statistic came from. But on this one, they found all the other stats but they couldn't figure out how to find the 3.3% which I found in a matter of 5 minutes...I just found it funny, don't know why..
HIGH OR LOW TAXES MERELY CHANGE FOR WHOM ONE IS WORKING.HIGHEFOR GOVERNMENT.LOWER-PRIVATE SECTOR.SO SUPPLY-SIDE IS A FAILURE.,BUT BUSH HAS FAITH SO MUCH HE IS WILLING TO WORSEN THE DEFICIT.FAITH=STUPIDITY!