Skrum: I'd assume this is because the lines still have congruent slopes. That is to say wages still corresponded to productivity. As you can clearly note in 1980 this was no longer the case, which i assume is why the graph is divided as such. Arguably done of the difference in wage and productivity can be attributed to technology and that's probably what you saw in the 70s. I'm sure advances in technology continued to contribute to the difference between wage and productivity for the next 30 years as well but obviously not to a degree that would explain why productivity detached itself from wages. The explanation is that in 1980 supply side economics were implemented.

*some
Not done

The slopes are not the same since the 60ies. They may have the same algebraic sign, but they are not the same. The fact that technological development is not the cause for the development is anything but obvious. Stating things as "obvious" usually means that you can't back them up.

I am with the fact that icecream creates facts.
In addition, women working outside the kitchen cause deficit spending as we can clearly see in the graphs.
Furthermore, bread is the reason behind massmurderers, not computer games. 100% of the murderers have been eating bread in their lifes.

and dont forget about the correlation/causation between pirates and global warming:

http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/

(scroll halfway down to see the graph)

The flying spaghetti monster is the best by far, no question. Very closely followed though by Russel's Teapot.

So what explains the sudden detachment of wages from productivity in the 80s? Anything else that changes in the 1980s that could explain it?

How could Reagan affect anything during his presidency when you claim Obama can't affect anything during his?

Perhaps it was Carter's fault?

The point is that the detachment started in 1972. So what happened in 1972 that may have launched the detachment?

We're speaking about two different things skrum. Yes productivity increased more relative to wage since 72, but this can be expected to occur over time as technology improves. You can note that trend was continuing since before 1972 (wages were higher relative to productivity for a while after WW2 and before 1972). Wages do not become DETACHED from productivity until 1980. At which point productivity increases while wages remain stagnant or productivity decreases while wages remain stagnant, as in the dot com bust. So my question is, why is this the case? Are you arguing this was just a manifestation of the institution of fiat currency in 1972 by Nixon that took 8 years to manifest itself?

To thrax: There was big money behind most of the stuff Reagan changed. There was big money against most everything Obama wanted to change. I know that was a troll question but it deserved answering for anyone ignorant of Reagan's policies reading this. The repeal of the Glass-Steagal act is a fine example of Reagan's sort of changes.