New paper forthcoming in Cliometrica with Peter Lindert. In the paper we show that between 1800-1914, inequality in cost of living fell offsetting sizable share of increase in nominal income inequality ssrn.com/abstract=33607… #econhist #econtwitter 
This is important because rising wages meant rising costs of services which featured heavily in baskets of the rich. There is thus a leveling of "cost of living". #econhist #econwitter
Once adjustments are made to measure "real" income inequality rather than nominal income inequality, the increase in the "gilded age" was minimized and maybe did not occur (we are not certain on which of the two) #econhist #econtwitter
In the process, I accidentally created a wage series for Canadian history that spans from 1688 to 1913. @stillots1
We also point something important to the topic of migration, leveling trends were complemented by the fact that new world countries had cost of living MUCH more favorable to the poor. They were the best poor man's countries. @m_clem and @AlexNowrasteh
This is by far my favorite paper accepted in 2019. Its important for the study of inequality because it suggests the fragility of certain stylized facts (notably regarding Gilded age inequality) cc. @gabriel_zucman @PhilWMagness @judyzara @mungowitz
But most importantly, it confirms the point of @DeirdreMcClosk @PrudentiaMag : it was a period of great enrichment for everyone.
