![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
You use "Average compulsory payment wedge and average tax wedge for single taxpayers without children at average earnings, 2009" figures from OECD. But it's the WEDGE , not the Average net personal compulsory payment rate by family-type and wage level (as % of gross wage earnings) Moreover your source is from 2011 and you use 2011 figures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichek ( talk • contribs) 13:45, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The author should give the date of his figures. but he is not that smart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jajahada ( talk • contribs) 06:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure how you came to those figures on there. I am unsure what other countries are, although I know Australia's average wage is closer to $95,000 AUD, or $98,000 USD. [1] [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.211.200.88 ( talk) 09:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
References
It is not clear from which year the data is. Please add, who ever has information about it. -- 193.92.218.46 ( talk) 15:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Is there any research done on countries based on real wage? Average wages are essentially pointless when adjusted for inflation. CartoonDiablo ( talk) 19:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
data was taken form OECD. there's a link! but for some countries numbers are the same, for others are different. how come? for example, belgium. wikipedia says 40,591 and OECD says 40,591 also. but on wikipedia canada has 42,019 and on OECD it says 38245....etc.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.0.254.53 ( talk) 20:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
esta es la tabla del PIB per cápita no de los sueldos leñe!
these are not average wages but GDP per capita --
Of course it's average wages. Do the calculations yourself, as described. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lneal001 ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
What about the median wage, Where can we find that and compare? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.63.44.2 ( talk) 08:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Median household income has 2007 in it, but it seems wildly off from this table. Harburg ( talk) 19:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I find it hard to believe that an economically advanced country like Taiwan is lagging behind Poland. What is the primary source for this data? Readin ( talk) 04:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Taiwan and others are not listed because no information was available. Rest assured however, that it would most certainly be in the top 15 and ahead of Poland and some other European countries. Basically, only OECD countries had this info. Kind Regards, Lneal001 Lneal001 ( talk) 00:31, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I find is very hard to believe Canadian wages are lower than Irish wages (considering Canada's current economic resilience has been noted internationally). I feel this list reflects the GNI per capita of OECD countries. I am going to do the relevant calculations for 2010 myself and make the necessary changes I feel are bound to materialize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.59.169 ( talk) 09:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering the same thing, Where is Canada on this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.125.97 ( talk) 20:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Lneal00, I am afraid to say, but for the table shown here, the same rules apply. We need to show the sources, and make the data verifiable. As I understand it, you have just provided a link for the NCU, which is the first step. We need to show this data (NCU) in a column that has a reference to this data. Then, we need to show the PPPs, and finally the column that is already there.
I know that this is again a lot of work, and I do not want to put you under time pressure. I just want to make clear that these improvements are eventually needed. If you do not feel like doing it now, it can be done later. Just let me know. Tomeasy T C 23:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Tomeasy T C 20:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
If you click on the citation #3 and the table doesn't show up, do NOT fix the referencing! You have to appropriately play with the pivot table function on the OECD website to show the table as it is shown on Wikipedia - so the number are indeed cited correctly. ( 99.238.62.49 ( talk) 02:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC))
US Dollar? Euro? Zloty? Rubel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.66.234.191 ( talk) 16:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Whoever is putting the 2010 data, please verify it here, and confirm that the data is true so I do not delete it. In particular, the data for Ireland seems wrong. Plus, 2010 data does not exist yet! ~~lneal001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lneal001 ( talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I found this version useful. It was reverted by an IP user without explanation. Thoughts anyone? Scott Illini ( talk) 02:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
There should be mentioned also median wage in addition to average wage. Median wage is better figure, because it tells something how wealth is distributed to the people. -- Jouni Valkonen ( talk) 13:01, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
The article doesnt list the 34 member countries. Any reason why not ? (is the data not available ?) Would be nice to compare/contrast say Mexico with Spain. etc. Gizziiusa ( talk) 17:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)gizziiusa
People in Spain have a higher disposable salary than in Germany? Well, if it is true, it is a surprise. Can I have the sources please? Coon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.202.64 ( talk) 02:19, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
"Unlike the gross wage, which can be an inaccurate indicator of the well-being of a citizen since it does not represent the full amount of money the worker will be left to consume on goods or services, the disposable wage excludes compulsory deductions such as income tax, municipal tax, provincial/state income tax, social security (pension plan, medicare) and compulsory insurance, thus measuring only the direct earnings of the citizen"
This is not true. There maybe circumstances in which it is true. For example if a tyranical government imposes heavy taxes for teh benefit of a narrow elite. However, in general compulsary deductions, will at least in part, be spent by governments on schemes which benefit workers. eg in Europe/Canada on National Health care. 173.178.55.185 ( talk) 04:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Does really Spain have higher disposable wages than countries like Finland or Germany? This really comes as a surprise because most people in Spain believe that salaries in Germany etc, are much higher. What a disappointment they will get if they go to work to Germany! If these data are right, it is another example of the difference between reality and perceived reality.I know I already made some comments bout it before, but still it is difficult for me to believe. People in Spain often use countries like Germany to say that workers in Europe make three times more than in Spain and so on. If this is the case, the perception of reality in Spain is absolutely screwed. Coon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.203.72 ( talk) 16:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The average wage here in Norway is not in the low 40's, it was around 81 thousand USD in 2011 [1]. Whoever came up with this smoked something bad that day. 188.113.93.28 ( talk) 15:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
In PPPs it is. And the source of this data for Norway is from Norway itself! According to stat bank, which has a slightly different df., the avg annual wage is 457,000 Kr. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.169.129 ( talk) 05:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
I guess it is very complicated to have an exact figure for those estimates, but there is one big caveat: benefits. I have experienced it in person. I worked in Spain for some years and apart from my salary I received: one month paid vacation, health care insurance for my and my four member family, sick insurance, retirement insurance. All those things are mandatory in Spain and Western Europe. Now I am in the US. I do not have those benefits and if I had to pay for them, my salary would not even be enough. In short, workers compensation that does not include benefits is misleading. Pipo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.97.65 ( talk) 22:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
First, this is the list I've been looking for for years. If I understand the description correctly, this is the effective average wage adjusted by PPP--that is, even though a country may have a low absolute average income relative to the U.S. dollar, the figure in this list is adjusted upwards on account of the lower cost of goods and services in that country. Am I correct?
Can the list also give an idea of what prices feel like to the average person visiting another country? In other words, if the average wage in Poland works out to $20,000 per year, and I from the U.S. make the average (as shown here) of $54,000 per year, and I were able to work remotely earning the same income and live in Poland, would I find that I could live like someone in Poland making 2.7 times the average wage? On the contrast, would a family from Poland with a head of household who makes the average wage there find themselves feeling like a family living below the poverty line here?
If so, then this is a hugely useful reference to use when talking to other people who traveling to your country or if you visit another country, especially developing countries. For example, an income of US$500/month in Uruguay sounds impossibly low to someone living in the U.S., but adjusted for the cost of goods and services in Uruguay, $500/month may get someone a reasonably decent standard of living--maybe equivalent to someone earning 3 times that amount in the U.S. But when that Uruguayan visits the U.S., he might have to dig really deep into savings just to afford a budget trip, while I can visit Uruguay and live like a member of high society for less a day than I usually spend in the U.S.
Anyway, my real question is: is there any way to get data for all countries in the world? I see that the current data was sourced from OECD, but is there any way to calculate the numbers for other countries? I'd be fascinated to see how it works out.
If the figures are reasonably straightforward to calculate and we just need a "data entry clerk" to go through the mundane process of doing the simple arithmetic, I would volunteer. Point me in the right direction, please! :) cluth ( talk) 20:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Obviously wages in countries like Poland, Slovakia etc. can't be the same as for example Germany. Whoever copied the data from the OECD source made a ridiculous mistake and listed the wages in national currency units for some countries and PPP USD values for others. I'm fixing the gross wages data for some countries.
Also it's very important that in some countries workers get additional compensation (bonuses, medical insurance) from their employers. Does the OECD data account for that? USA: average wage $20 per hour but $32 per hour with all bonuses according to Bureau of Labour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EasternClock ( talk • contribs) 15:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Total average compensation (including all bonuses, health insurance[employer purchased is tax deductible]) in the USA is $31.16 per hour. Full time, full year worker equivalent is 2,080 hours. Therefore, the average annual compensation per full-time and full-year equivalent employee equals $64'812. (Sources: Bureau of Labor)
Much higher than the OECD figure that apparently does not include all compensations. EasternClock ( talk) 20:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
This article has recently been updated by Techastrax ( talk · contribs) to include map images showing the monthly average wage of each country. I reverted this change, based on the Wikipedia Manual of Style guideline to avoid the use of images to present textual information. The MOS is fairly clear on the reasons why such images should be avoided: they make the page slower to load and they reduce the accessibility of the information to visually impaired users. They also duplicate data already listed in the tables, and increase the workload to maintain the page (the same information must be updated in two places; and the map syntax is overly complicated). In short, I see that these maps do not improve the page, but rather make it less useful. After my revert, Techastrax re-reverted my change. In order to avoid an edit war, I invite Techastrax, and all other interested editors, to comment on the issue. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 20:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
There is no need for more average wage lists because the OECD list is the official list using the same methodology for all countries. And because the source of data is from national accounts, it's not subject to survey error. Also, the OECD gets it aggregate wages from the countries themselves. The OECD merely does the derivation to get full time wages. Another user is posting a list where the methodology is different for every country and therefore not comparable. His list cannot be permitted. lneal001 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Let's consider the scale of the Herculean task the number crunchers at the ILO set themselves. First, they work out the total wage bill for every country in the world. To do that they get the average salary from each office for national statistics, and multiply that amount by the number of earners in each country. In this way, they are able to give more weight to countries which have more workers in them. The average salary in China has more influence on the world average than the average salary in New Zealand, where many fewer people live.
"It certainly tells you something about the state of worldwide economic development, I would say. We always use Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as the reference, but I think we also have a whole lot of trouble understanding exactly what is the meaning of GDP, whereas wages are a much more obvious indicator of the quality of life. "It tells you something about the quality of life of the middle classes. It tells you where most of the people are at the end of the month, and it gives you an idea of how they live - how often they can go out, what they can buy, where they can live, what kinds of rents they can afford. And that's the interesting thing, compared to GDP per capita, which is a much more abstract notion." And if you understand the limitations of this number - that it gives a rough idea of average employee salaries - Belser says it holds an important lesson."
When reliable sources disagree, present what the various sources say, give each side its due weight, and maintain a neutral point of view. Source: WP:Verifiability.
We shouldn't use exchange rate figures in any lists here that are comparing countries internationally because it doesn't take into account the cost of living and is therefore misleading and uncomparable. Users need to stop adding exchange rate figures to the OECD list. Now, as for the more pressing issue, I have said multiple times that using national statistics is deceiving and highly misleading due to the massive differences in methodologies used between different countries. We must only use internationally agreed methodologies set by a single source. Inventing a list out of national statistics is a clear violation of WP:OR and will be removed. Massyparcer ( talk) 04:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should the "List of countries by average wage" page include ILO statistics and official national statistics in addition to the OECD statistics?
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE) 21:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I have remarked that Ilo's stats were in PPP dollars but in 2005 dollars, so when people visit this article they won't understand because on ilo table us wage is about $3200 but in the reality it's about $4500 from the government so I keep UNECE on the top because it's the most understanding source in real dollars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techastrax ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
So you have to mension what kind of dollars is used fort each list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techastrax ( talk • contribs) 02:19, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
This is fort Lneal. Don't delete it. read consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techastrax ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
At this point, we have to seriously question what your real agenda is here. It doesn't matter whether you created this page or not. You have no source to prove they were "deleted" by ILO and have no source to prove they're "verified as not accurate". Please backup your claims with sources otherwise nobody will believe anything you claim. Any such claim will be taken with a grain of salt in such controversial debates. If you haven't read WP:Consensus:
Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which, although an ideal result, is not always achievable).
We do have a very strong consensus here. You're the only one removing the ILO list and making all sorts of unsourced claims from telling me that you phoned the ILO up (textbook example of violating WP:OR) to doing your own invented calculations, which by its very nature is violating WP:OR. The truth is that we have a very reliable source which is the BBC quoting the ILO numbers and thoroughly mentioning its methodology and flaws, which as other non-involved editors have pointed out, is not a problem by Wikipedia policies. Please let the readers make their own judgement as to whether it is accurate or not - You have no right to do that judgement yourself here. I strongly advise you to take your time and read WP:OR and cease your disruptive editing. Massyparcer ( talk) 07:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I think that lneal has a good idea so we only have to do like on the article GDP per capita, to do lists in PPP and an other part in current USD. So it will be clearer for everyone. Do lneal used world banks figures for PPP conversion? Techastrax ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Consistent with the fact that exchange rates do not measure money's purchasing power, and with international backing (OECD, WB, etc), only PPPs should be used. Thus I am in a position of continually getting rid of lists here that are on the basis on exchange rates. The editor who was doing this said "PPP is garbage" which obviously flies in the face of consensus, and is flat out false. PPPs are much better than exchange rates when comparing incomes. Lneal001 ( talk) 02:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
In addition to listing everything by PPP that Lneal has raised above, I will add that all figures must be disposable net figures. Now, this is obviously not possible for the UN or ILO list since neither source has compulsory deduction figures. However, the OECD does and we shouldn't list a duplicate gross income list here. The disposable wage must be recalculated into monthly figures and replace that gross list to avoid duplicate lists and confusion. This must be mentioned in the methodologies, otherwise these lists can be highly misleading, not representing the real income people actually take home to spend on goods and services. Massyparcer ( talk) 06:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
STRONGLY DISAGREE You have to use gross, net, current USD and PPP that's right. But the way it's calculated depend of everything, we are not fiscally able. There are a lot of different ways to pay 0 taxes, it's an individual calculation. Your oecd figures show the edge percent of compulsory deduction. So we can mention it to get an idea. So you can build your list after other lists. But you have to let the gross and original datas. Thanks for understanding.
I agree to add a net table of annual wages from oecd containing ppp and current usd. Current usd is used in gdp per capita more than ppp so don't destroy the original table from unece, it's not misleading at all and you converted it in ppp so it's a second violation, then someone deleted the ilo list it's a third violation. It's messy on this article. So I ask everyone to contribute normally and don't destroy original sources and wrong advices.
I agree to add a net table of annual wages from oecd containing ppp and current usd. Current usd is used in gdp per capita more than ppp so don't destroy the original table from unece, it's not misleading at all and you converted it in ppp so it's a second violation, then someone deleted the ilo list it's a third violation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colioneros ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
I didn't say that you deleted it. No the consensus is against the us propaganda who want to be first on the list. But Norway and Switzerland have higher salaries. Nobody can't say that after PPP conversion us is the first because PPP depends on the place you are in a country too (cities / country side). So we have in this page 2 lists with every figures (current and PPP).
No I don't know what are you doing Massyparcer but the real original figures are the official ones. PPP is ok for me but subject to discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboubox ( talk • contribs) 15:12, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Gdp per capita are exprimed with exchange rates and PPP, so nobody can delete exchange rate. Masyparcer is the only hostile from the consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboubox ( talk • contribs) 16:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
STRONGLY DISAGREE. It's your opinion. Current usd is used in official sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboubox ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Update: Zboubox and other socks ignoring the prevailing legitimate consensus to use PPPs and not exchange rates have been indefinitely blocked as per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ichek. Please watch out for any other new users emulating their behaviour and report them accordingly. This article has been abused for too long by puppets and seriously needs to be protected from new users to allow experienced editors gain consensus in the correct and healthy way..I have put the list back to where it was before those socks vandalized it. Massyparcer ( talk)
Because it is the real figures of the UNECE. Someone converted it in PPP, this is a violation because it is not sourced... They made themselves calculations and I am not sure that data are correct. What's the methodology used? So STRICTLY DISAGREE that someone remove the original figures. Consensus done because masyparcer is the only one hostile and doesn't improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.231.154 ( talk) 14:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Massy,
about your uncommented/unmotivated reverse edits about Switzerland's figures.
Your figure, the 39.89% as the compulsory deductions (or as you put it: "average tax wedges and compulsory payment wedges (updated March 2013) for single taxpayers at average earnings without children in 2012") would only be true for a very small percentage of all tax paying Swiss inhabitants (probably less than 1%), since the top marginal tax rate (Personal income tax & employee social security contributions (All-in rate)) in 2012 was 41.8% (top marginal income tax: 31.6%). And we have a so called progressive tax rate... getting higher the higher your income is. Hey, I live here!
But we speak about the average wage (Switzerland: US$ PPP: 53 265) in this table, don't we?!! And in order to reach 41.8% you must earn a lot more than this average income!
And the "All-in average personal income tax rates at average wage by family type" (Table I.6) for a single person without children in 2012 in Switzerland was 17.1% (all in rate)!!!
So US$ PPP 53 265 - 17.1% makes still = 44157, don't you agree?!
So please, would you be so kind to explain how you derive the "compulsory deductions" figures?!
By the way: To deduct the all-in tax rate of a single person without children from the average wage of a country in order to make countries comparable is not the most reasonable/smart way to do it, since only a minority of all working people in a country is not married and has no children! ;-)
-- Cherio, ZH8000 ( talk) 01:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?datasetcode=PDBI_I4
Well, then what do you suggest we apply for taxes to the average wage list we had previously? I'm not sure we can apply the single/not married/100% average wage category again since clearly not every worker is like that. If only the OECD publishes average tax rates, this issue would be resolved. Labour costs and average wage are the same thing - The very document that you showed me clearly reads right from the start that they're comparable: "This Report therefore adopts a specific methodology to produce comparative statistics covering taxes, benefits and labour costs across OECD Member countries". If you disagree, you should prove that labour cost and average wage are different with an academic source, otherwise it would constitute to OR. Until we can figure out how to get a net income addressing specifically ZH800's concern, I suggest the current tables stay since they do not require additional potentially original researched calculation that would violate WP:OR. The current tables, as it stands, do not violate WP:OR and meet WP:V. Massyparcer ( talk) 19:46, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Massy,
One way to get a net figure and produce a more consistent figure is by finding a tax calculator for each country and simply plugging in the number and getting a net figure. I can find one for most of these countries. What do you think? The current tax figure is better than nothing but represents more than what employees pay as it also include employer costs, which therefore overstates an employees tax burden. I agree to maintain to the stable version, but please tell me what you think about the idea of cited wage calculators. Lneal001 ( talk) 21:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
THE DATA ON THIS PAGE IS VERY INACCURATE. I CANNOT CODE, BUT I JUST CHECKED THE 2014 OECD BETTER LIFE INDEX www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org. PLEASE CHECK THIS WEBSITE (ITS VERY CREDIBLE) AND UPDATE THIS INFORMATION — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ledharri (
talk •
contribs) 22:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
I can confirm the data is off by a mile, for example, here is the official average wage for Brazil: http://www.brasil.gov.br/economia-e-emprego/2014/04/salario-medio-alcanca-patamar-de-r-1-166-84 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.138.204.165 ( talk) 18:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
New data can be obtained at: https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-disposable-income.htm Someone should update the article with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.255.229.1 ( talk) 17:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
"Gross income" ( Average annual wage) includes all family types not limited to 1 earner, 2 children. Whereas "Disposal income" is deducted (actuary multiplied by "Compulsory deduction percentage for 1 earner, 2 children)". This is clearly Original research. So "Disposal income" should be removed from the table.―― Phoenix7777 ( talk) 10:20, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Some of the tables do not seem to be in any exact order. Jidanni ( talk) 10:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I removed the Taxing Wages sourced net earnings because in addition to the footnotes that listed the limitations, I just found out that the net earnings excluded a huge part of the labor force and are not reflective of all workers.
http://www.oecd.org/els/soc/Methodology.pdf
"Earnings are calculated for Sectors B to N inclusive of the ISIC Rev. 4 industry classification for most countries"
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcst.asp?Cl=27
And sectors B to N excludes all government workers and other industries. In some countries like France, public workers constitute over 1/5 of the labor force (not even including the other excluded industries), so the exclusion of these workers makes the data not appropriate for the page where the idea is to calculate ALL wages of ALL workers, and where the presumption of the page is that it represents all workers. Lneal001 ( talk) 18:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I just noticed that this article didn't contain the ILO list. It looks like at the time it had been deleted from their website, but the list is there now. Is anyone up to reinstating the list? — Ynhockey ( Talk) 22:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello all- I have no interest in this article, but I wanted to comment that the second sentence starts off with an interjection that could use some explaining: The wage distribution is right-skewed... The wage distribution being referred to should be identified, and "right-skewed" should be defined. Eric talk 00:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
You use "Average compulsory payment wedge and average tax wedge for single taxpayers without children at average earnings, 2009" figures from OECD. But it's the WEDGE , not the Average net personal compulsory payment rate by family-type and wage level (as % of gross wage earnings) Moreover your source is from 2011 and you use 2011 figures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichek ( talk • contribs) 13:45, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The author should give the date of his figures. but he is not that smart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jajahada ( talk • contribs) 06:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure how you came to those figures on there. I am unsure what other countries are, although I know Australia's average wage is closer to $95,000 AUD, or $98,000 USD. [1] [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.211.200.88 ( talk) 09:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
References
It is not clear from which year the data is. Please add, who ever has information about it. -- 193.92.218.46 ( talk) 15:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Is there any research done on countries based on real wage? Average wages are essentially pointless when adjusted for inflation. CartoonDiablo ( talk) 19:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
data was taken form OECD. there's a link! but for some countries numbers are the same, for others are different. how come? for example, belgium. wikipedia says 40,591 and OECD says 40,591 also. but on wikipedia canada has 42,019 and on OECD it says 38245....etc.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.0.254.53 ( talk) 20:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
esta es la tabla del PIB per cápita no de los sueldos leñe!
these are not average wages but GDP per capita --
Of course it's average wages. Do the calculations yourself, as described. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lneal001 ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
What about the median wage, Where can we find that and compare? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.63.44.2 ( talk) 08:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Median household income has 2007 in it, but it seems wildly off from this table. Harburg ( talk) 19:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I find it hard to believe that an economically advanced country like Taiwan is lagging behind Poland. What is the primary source for this data? Readin ( talk) 04:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Taiwan and others are not listed because no information was available. Rest assured however, that it would most certainly be in the top 15 and ahead of Poland and some other European countries. Basically, only OECD countries had this info. Kind Regards, Lneal001 Lneal001 ( talk) 00:31, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I find is very hard to believe Canadian wages are lower than Irish wages (considering Canada's current economic resilience has been noted internationally). I feel this list reflects the GNI per capita of OECD countries. I am going to do the relevant calculations for 2010 myself and make the necessary changes I feel are bound to materialize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.59.169 ( talk) 09:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering the same thing, Where is Canada on this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.125.97 ( talk) 20:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Lneal00, I am afraid to say, but for the table shown here, the same rules apply. We need to show the sources, and make the data verifiable. As I understand it, you have just provided a link for the NCU, which is the first step. We need to show this data (NCU) in a column that has a reference to this data. Then, we need to show the PPPs, and finally the column that is already there.
I know that this is again a lot of work, and I do not want to put you under time pressure. I just want to make clear that these improvements are eventually needed. If you do not feel like doing it now, it can be done later. Just let me know. Tomeasy T C 23:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
No problem. Tomeasy T C 20:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
If you click on the citation #3 and the table doesn't show up, do NOT fix the referencing! You have to appropriately play with the pivot table function on the OECD website to show the table as it is shown on Wikipedia - so the number are indeed cited correctly. ( 99.238.62.49 ( talk) 02:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC))
US Dollar? Euro? Zloty? Rubel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.66.234.191 ( talk) 16:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Whoever is putting the 2010 data, please verify it here, and confirm that the data is true so I do not delete it. In particular, the data for Ireland seems wrong. Plus, 2010 data does not exist yet! ~~lneal001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lneal001 ( talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I found this version useful. It was reverted by an IP user without explanation. Thoughts anyone? Scott Illini ( talk) 02:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
There should be mentioned also median wage in addition to average wage. Median wage is better figure, because it tells something how wealth is distributed to the people. -- Jouni Valkonen ( talk) 13:01, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
The article doesnt list the 34 member countries. Any reason why not ? (is the data not available ?) Would be nice to compare/contrast say Mexico with Spain. etc. Gizziiusa ( talk) 17:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)gizziiusa
People in Spain have a higher disposable salary than in Germany? Well, if it is true, it is a surprise. Can I have the sources please? Coon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.202.64 ( talk) 02:19, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
"Unlike the gross wage, which can be an inaccurate indicator of the well-being of a citizen since it does not represent the full amount of money the worker will be left to consume on goods or services, the disposable wage excludes compulsory deductions such as income tax, municipal tax, provincial/state income tax, social security (pension plan, medicare) and compulsory insurance, thus measuring only the direct earnings of the citizen"
This is not true. There maybe circumstances in which it is true. For example if a tyranical government imposes heavy taxes for teh benefit of a narrow elite. However, in general compulsary deductions, will at least in part, be spent by governments on schemes which benefit workers. eg in Europe/Canada on National Health care. 173.178.55.185 ( talk) 04:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Does really Spain have higher disposable wages than countries like Finland or Germany? This really comes as a surprise because most people in Spain believe that salaries in Germany etc, are much higher. What a disappointment they will get if they go to work to Germany! If these data are right, it is another example of the difference between reality and perceived reality.I know I already made some comments bout it before, but still it is difficult for me to believe. People in Spain often use countries like Germany to say that workers in Europe make three times more than in Spain and so on. If this is the case, the perception of reality in Spain is absolutely screwed. Coon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.203.72 ( talk) 16:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The average wage here in Norway is not in the low 40's, it was around 81 thousand USD in 2011 [1]. Whoever came up with this smoked something bad that day. 188.113.93.28 ( talk) 15:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
In PPPs it is. And the source of this data for Norway is from Norway itself! According to stat bank, which has a slightly different df., the avg annual wage is 457,000 Kr. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.169.129 ( talk) 05:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
I guess it is very complicated to have an exact figure for those estimates, but there is one big caveat: benefits. I have experienced it in person. I worked in Spain for some years and apart from my salary I received: one month paid vacation, health care insurance for my and my four member family, sick insurance, retirement insurance. All those things are mandatory in Spain and Western Europe. Now I am in the US. I do not have those benefits and if I had to pay for them, my salary would not even be enough. In short, workers compensation that does not include benefits is misleading. Pipo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.97.65 ( talk) 22:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
First, this is the list I've been looking for for years. If I understand the description correctly, this is the effective average wage adjusted by PPP--that is, even though a country may have a low absolute average income relative to the U.S. dollar, the figure in this list is adjusted upwards on account of the lower cost of goods and services in that country. Am I correct?
Can the list also give an idea of what prices feel like to the average person visiting another country? In other words, if the average wage in Poland works out to $20,000 per year, and I from the U.S. make the average (as shown here) of $54,000 per year, and I were able to work remotely earning the same income and live in Poland, would I find that I could live like someone in Poland making 2.7 times the average wage? On the contrast, would a family from Poland with a head of household who makes the average wage there find themselves feeling like a family living below the poverty line here?
If so, then this is a hugely useful reference to use when talking to other people who traveling to your country or if you visit another country, especially developing countries. For example, an income of US$500/month in Uruguay sounds impossibly low to someone living in the U.S., but adjusted for the cost of goods and services in Uruguay, $500/month may get someone a reasonably decent standard of living--maybe equivalent to someone earning 3 times that amount in the U.S. But when that Uruguayan visits the U.S., he might have to dig really deep into savings just to afford a budget trip, while I can visit Uruguay and live like a member of high society for less a day than I usually spend in the U.S.
Anyway, my real question is: is there any way to get data for all countries in the world? I see that the current data was sourced from OECD, but is there any way to calculate the numbers for other countries? I'd be fascinated to see how it works out.
If the figures are reasonably straightforward to calculate and we just need a "data entry clerk" to go through the mundane process of doing the simple arithmetic, I would volunteer. Point me in the right direction, please! :) cluth ( talk) 20:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Obviously wages in countries like Poland, Slovakia etc. can't be the same as for example Germany. Whoever copied the data from the OECD source made a ridiculous mistake and listed the wages in national currency units for some countries and PPP USD values for others. I'm fixing the gross wages data for some countries.
Also it's very important that in some countries workers get additional compensation (bonuses, medical insurance) from their employers. Does the OECD data account for that? USA: average wage $20 per hour but $32 per hour with all bonuses according to Bureau of Labour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EasternClock ( talk • contribs) 15:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Total average compensation (including all bonuses, health insurance[employer purchased is tax deductible]) in the USA is $31.16 per hour. Full time, full year worker equivalent is 2,080 hours. Therefore, the average annual compensation per full-time and full-year equivalent employee equals $64'812. (Sources: Bureau of Labor)
Much higher than the OECD figure that apparently does not include all compensations. EasternClock ( talk) 20:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
This article has recently been updated by Techastrax ( talk · contribs) to include map images showing the monthly average wage of each country. I reverted this change, based on the Wikipedia Manual of Style guideline to avoid the use of images to present textual information. The MOS is fairly clear on the reasons why such images should be avoided: they make the page slower to load and they reduce the accessibility of the information to visually impaired users. They also duplicate data already listed in the tables, and increase the workload to maintain the page (the same information must be updated in two places; and the map syntax is overly complicated). In short, I see that these maps do not improve the page, but rather make it less useful. After my revert, Techastrax re-reverted my change. In order to avoid an edit war, I invite Techastrax, and all other interested editors, to comment on the issue. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 20:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
There is no need for more average wage lists because the OECD list is the official list using the same methodology for all countries. And because the source of data is from national accounts, it's not subject to survey error. Also, the OECD gets it aggregate wages from the countries themselves. The OECD merely does the derivation to get full time wages. Another user is posting a list where the methodology is different for every country and therefore not comparable. His list cannot be permitted. lneal001 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Let's consider the scale of the Herculean task the number crunchers at the ILO set themselves. First, they work out the total wage bill for every country in the world. To do that they get the average salary from each office for national statistics, and multiply that amount by the number of earners in each country. In this way, they are able to give more weight to countries which have more workers in them. The average salary in China has more influence on the world average than the average salary in New Zealand, where many fewer people live.
"It certainly tells you something about the state of worldwide economic development, I would say. We always use Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as the reference, but I think we also have a whole lot of trouble understanding exactly what is the meaning of GDP, whereas wages are a much more obvious indicator of the quality of life. "It tells you something about the quality of life of the middle classes. It tells you where most of the people are at the end of the month, and it gives you an idea of how they live - how often they can go out, what they can buy, where they can live, what kinds of rents they can afford. And that's the interesting thing, compared to GDP per capita, which is a much more abstract notion." And if you understand the limitations of this number - that it gives a rough idea of average employee salaries - Belser says it holds an important lesson."
When reliable sources disagree, present what the various sources say, give each side its due weight, and maintain a neutral point of view. Source: WP:Verifiability.
We shouldn't use exchange rate figures in any lists here that are comparing countries internationally because it doesn't take into account the cost of living and is therefore misleading and uncomparable. Users need to stop adding exchange rate figures to the OECD list. Now, as for the more pressing issue, I have said multiple times that using national statistics is deceiving and highly misleading due to the massive differences in methodologies used between different countries. We must only use internationally agreed methodologies set by a single source. Inventing a list out of national statistics is a clear violation of WP:OR and will be removed. Massyparcer ( talk) 04:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should the "List of countries by average wage" page include ILO statistics and official national statistics in addition to the OECD statistics?
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE) 21:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I have remarked that Ilo's stats were in PPP dollars but in 2005 dollars, so when people visit this article they won't understand because on ilo table us wage is about $3200 but in the reality it's about $4500 from the government so I keep UNECE on the top because it's the most understanding source in real dollars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techastrax ( talk • contribs) 13:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
So you have to mension what kind of dollars is used fort each list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techastrax ( talk • contribs) 02:19, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
This is fort Lneal. Don't delete it. read consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techastrax ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
At this point, we have to seriously question what your real agenda is here. It doesn't matter whether you created this page or not. You have no source to prove they were "deleted" by ILO and have no source to prove they're "verified as not accurate". Please backup your claims with sources otherwise nobody will believe anything you claim. Any such claim will be taken with a grain of salt in such controversial debates. If you haven't read WP:Consensus:
Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which, although an ideal result, is not always achievable).
We do have a very strong consensus here. You're the only one removing the ILO list and making all sorts of unsourced claims from telling me that you phoned the ILO up (textbook example of violating WP:OR) to doing your own invented calculations, which by its very nature is violating WP:OR. The truth is that we have a very reliable source which is the BBC quoting the ILO numbers and thoroughly mentioning its methodology and flaws, which as other non-involved editors have pointed out, is not a problem by Wikipedia policies. Please let the readers make their own judgement as to whether it is accurate or not - You have no right to do that judgement yourself here. I strongly advise you to take your time and read WP:OR and cease your disruptive editing. Massyparcer ( talk) 07:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I think that lneal has a good idea so we only have to do like on the article GDP per capita, to do lists in PPP and an other part in current USD. So it will be clearer for everyone. Do lneal used world banks figures for PPP conversion? Techastrax ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Consistent with the fact that exchange rates do not measure money's purchasing power, and with international backing (OECD, WB, etc), only PPPs should be used. Thus I am in a position of continually getting rid of lists here that are on the basis on exchange rates. The editor who was doing this said "PPP is garbage" which obviously flies in the face of consensus, and is flat out false. PPPs are much better than exchange rates when comparing incomes. Lneal001 ( talk) 02:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
In addition to listing everything by PPP that Lneal has raised above, I will add that all figures must be disposable net figures. Now, this is obviously not possible for the UN or ILO list since neither source has compulsory deduction figures. However, the OECD does and we shouldn't list a duplicate gross income list here. The disposable wage must be recalculated into monthly figures and replace that gross list to avoid duplicate lists and confusion. This must be mentioned in the methodologies, otherwise these lists can be highly misleading, not representing the real income people actually take home to spend on goods and services. Massyparcer ( talk) 06:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
STRONGLY DISAGREE You have to use gross, net, current USD and PPP that's right. But the way it's calculated depend of everything, we are not fiscally able. There are a lot of different ways to pay 0 taxes, it's an individual calculation. Your oecd figures show the edge percent of compulsory deduction. So we can mention it to get an idea. So you can build your list after other lists. But you have to let the gross and original datas. Thanks for understanding.
I agree to add a net table of annual wages from oecd containing ppp and current usd. Current usd is used in gdp per capita more than ppp so don't destroy the original table from unece, it's not misleading at all and you converted it in ppp so it's a second violation, then someone deleted the ilo list it's a third violation. It's messy on this article. So I ask everyone to contribute normally and don't destroy original sources and wrong advices.
I agree to add a net table of annual wages from oecd containing ppp and current usd. Current usd is used in gdp per capita more than ppp so don't destroy the original table from unece, it's not misleading at all and you converted it in ppp so it's a second violation, then someone deleted the ilo list it's a third violation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colioneros ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
I didn't say that you deleted it. No the consensus is against the us propaganda who want to be first on the list. But Norway and Switzerland have higher salaries. Nobody can't say that after PPP conversion us is the first because PPP depends on the place you are in a country too (cities / country side). So we have in this page 2 lists with every figures (current and PPP).
No I don't know what are you doing Massyparcer but the real original figures are the official ones. PPP is ok for me but subject to discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboubox ( talk • contribs) 15:12, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Gdp per capita are exprimed with exchange rates and PPP, so nobody can delete exchange rate. Masyparcer is the only hostile from the consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboubox ( talk • contribs) 16:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
STRONGLY DISAGREE. It's your opinion. Current usd is used in official sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboubox ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Update: Zboubox and other socks ignoring the prevailing legitimate consensus to use PPPs and not exchange rates have been indefinitely blocked as per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ichek. Please watch out for any other new users emulating their behaviour and report them accordingly. This article has been abused for too long by puppets and seriously needs to be protected from new users to allow experienced editors gain consensus in the correct and healthy way..I have put the list back to where it was before those socks vandalized it. Massyparcer ( talk)
Because it is the real figures of the UNECE. Someone converted it in PPP, this is a violation because it is not sourced... They made themselves calculations and I am not sure that data are correct. What's the methodology used? So STRICTLY DISAGREE that someone remove the original figures. Consensus done because masyparcer is the only one hostile and doesn't improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.231.154 ( talk) 14:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Massy,
about your uncommented/unmotivated reverse edits about Switzerland's figures.
Your figure, the 39.89% as the compulsory deductions (or as you put it: "average tax wedges and compulsory payment wedges (updated March 2013) for single taxpayers at average earnings without children in 2012") would only be true for a very small percentage of all tax paying Swiss inhabitants (probably less than 1%), since the top marginal tax rate (Personal income tax & employee social security contributions (All-in rate)) in 2012 was 41.8% (top marginal income tax: 31.6%). And we have a so called progressive tax rate... getting higher the higher your income is. Hey, I live here!
But we speak about the average wage (Switzerland: US$ PPP: 53 265) in this table, don't we?!! And in order to reach 41.8% you must earn a lot more than this average income!
And the "All-in average personal income tax rates at average wage by family type" (Table I.6) for a single person without children in 2012 in Switzerland was 17.1% (all in rate)!!!
So US$ PPP 53 265 - 17.1% makes still = 44157, don't you agree?!
So please, would you be so kind to explain how you derive the "compulsory deductions" figures?!
By the way: To deduct the all-in tax rate of a single person without children from the average wage of a country in order to make countries comparable is not the most reasonable/smart way to do it, since only a minority of all working people in a country is not married and has no children! ;-)
-- Cherio, ZH8000 ( talk) 01:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?datasetcode=PDBI_I4
Well, then what do you suggest we apply for taxes to the average wage list we had previously? I'm not sure we can apply the single/not married/100% average wage category again since clearly not every worker is like that. If only the OECD publishes average tax rates, this issue would be resolved. Labour costs and average wage are the same thing - The very document that you showed me clearly reads right from the start that they're comparable: "This Report therefore adopts a specific methodology to produce comparative statistics covering taxes, benefits and labour costs across OECD Member countries". If you disagree, you should prove that labour cost and average wage are different with an academic source, otherwise it would constitute to OR. Until we can figure out how to get a net income addressing specifically ZH800's concern, I suggest the current tables stay since they do not require additional potentially original researched calculation that would violate WP:OR. The current tables, as it stands, do not violate WP:OR and meet WP:V. Massyparcer ( talk) 19:46, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Massy,
One way to get a net figure and produce a more consistent figure is by finding a tax calculator for each country and simply plugging in the number and getting a net figure. I can find one for most of these countries. What do you think? The current tax figure is better than nothing but represents more than what employees pay as it also include employer costs, which therefore overstates an employees tax burden. I agree to maintain to the stable version, but please tell me what you think about the idea of cited wage calculators. Lneal001 ( talk) 21:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
THE DATA ON THIS PAGE IS VERY INACCURATE. I CANNOT CODE, BUT I JUST CHECKED THE 2014 OECD BETTER LIFE INDEX www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org. PLEASE CHECK THIS WEBSITE (ITS VERY CREDIBLE) AND UPDATE THIS INFORMATION — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ledharri (
talk •
contribs) 22:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
I can confirm the data is off by a mile, for example, here is the official average wage for Brazil: http://www.brasil.gov.br/economia-e-emprego/2014/04/salario-medio-alcanca-patamar-de-r-1-166-84 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.138.204.165 ( talk) 18:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
New data can be obtained at: https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-disposable-income.htm Someone should update the article with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.255.229.1 ( talk) 17:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
"Gross income" ( Average annual wage) includes all family types not limited to 1 earner, 2 children. Whereas "Disposal income" is deducted (actuary multiplied by "Compulsory deduction percentage for 1 earner, 2 children)". This is clearly Original research. So "Disposal income" should be removed from the table.―― Phoenix7777 ( talk) 10:20, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Some of the tables do not seem to be in any exact order. Jidanni ( talk) 10:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I removed the Taxing Wages sourced net earnings because in addition to the footnotes that listed the limitations, I just found out that the net earnings excluded a huge part of the labor force and are not reflective of all workers.
http://www.oecd.org/els/soc/Methodology.pdf
"Earnings are calculated for Sectors B to N inclusive of the ISIC Rev. 4 industry classification for most countries"
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcst.asp?Cl=27
And sectors B to N excludes all government workers and other industries. In some countries like France, public workers constitute over 1/5 of the labor force (not even including the other excluded industries), so the exclusion of these workers makes the data not appropriate for the page where the idea is to calculate ALL wages of ALL workers, and where the presumption of the page is that it represents all workers. Lneal001 ( talk) 18:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I just noticed that this article didn't contain the ILO list. It looks like at the time it had been deleted from their website, but the list is there now. Is anyone up to reinstating the list? — Ynhockey ( Talk) 22:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello all- I have no interest in this article, but I wanted to comment that the second sentence starts off with an interjection that could use some explaining: The wage distribution is right-skewed... The wage distribution being referred to should be identified, and "right-skewed" should be defined. Eric talk 00:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)