the question is
"Economists use the rule of 70 to quickly calculate the number of years required for a variable to double at a given growth rate. If the variable grows at the rate x% per year, then 70 divided by x (drop the percent) tells you the number of years it takes for this variable to double.
The article uses this kind of calculation to show the difference between labor productivity growth of 1.4% versus 2.5%. At a growth rate of 1.4% per year, labor productivity (and wages) will double every 50 years because 70 divided by 1.4 is about 50. A growth rate of 2.5% will double labor productivity every 28 years because 70 divided by 2.5 equals 28.
In the year 2000, average hourly compensation in the private business sector was about $37 per hour worked (measured in the purchasing power of 1996 dollars). If labor productivity grew at the rate of 1.4% per year, what would average hourly compensation be in the year 2100 (still measured in 1996 dollars per hour worked)?"
So 70/2.4 is 50, so that means it will double every 50 years right? Since 2000 to 2100 is 100 years, does that mean I double $37 ($74), and then double $74, which gives me an answer of $148?
And also there's another problem, same format but different numbers
"In the year 2000, average hourly compensation in the private business sector was about $37 per hour worked (measured in the purchasing power of 1996 dollars). If labor productivity grew at the rate of 3.5% per year, what would average hourly compensation be in the year 2100 (still measured in 1996 dollars per hour worked)?"
So this one is 70/3.5=20. Doubling time is 20 years. That means it doubles 5 times during 2000 to 2100 right? So would it be double $37, double $74, double $148, double $296, double $592, to finally get $1184?
"Economists use the rule of 70 to quickly calculate the number of years required for a variable to double at a given growth rate. If the variable grows at the rate x% per year, then 70 divided by x (drop the percent) tells you the number of years it takes for this variable to double.
The article uses this kind of calculation to show the difference between labor productivity growth of 1.4% versus 2.5%. At a growth rate of 1.4% per year, labor productivity (and wages) will double every 50 years because 70 divided by 1.4 is about 50. A growth rate of 2.5% will double labor productivity every 28 years because 70 divided by 2.5 equals 28.
In the year 2000, average hourly compensation in the private business sector was about $37 per hour worked (measured in the purchasing power of 1996 dollars). If labor productivity grew at the rate of 1.4% per year, what would average hourly compensation be in the year 2100 (still measured in 1996 dollars per hour worked)?"
So 70/2.4 is 50, so that means it will double every 50 years right? Since 2000 to 2100 is 100 years, does that mean I double $37 ($74), and then double $74, which gives me an answer of $148?
And also there's another problem, same format but different numbers
"In the year 2000, average hourly compensation in the private business sector was about $37 per hour worked (measured in the purchasing power of 1996 dollars). If labor productivity grew at the rate of 3.5% per year, what would average hourly compensation be in the year 2100 (still measured in 1996 dollars per hour worked)?"
So this one is 70/3.5=20. Doubling time is 20 years. That means it doubles 5 times during 2000 to 2100 right? So would it be double $37, double $74, double $148, double $296, double $592, to finally get $1184?