Ed is giving a speech advocating against a set, federal minimum wage

He cites a statistic that states that hourly wage workers in 1948 made, on average, only $9.69 per hour, whereas in 2011, they made $22.53. Ed states, "As you can see, workers today are making more than double what their parents and grandparents earned. There is clearly no need for a set, federal minimum wage." Has Ed used a strong statistic? Defend your answer in detail, explaining what sort of information Ed's use of this statistic does and does not tell us.
What will be an ideal response?

The best answers will identify:
1. that this is a weak statistic choice. Outstanding answers will note that we cannot be sure whether this statistic is strong or not because Ed's use of the statistic is terribly flawed.
2. the strengths of the statistic use, such as:
• attempting to show the same issue as it trends over time.
• giving a national average for a national issue.
3. the weaknesses of the statistic use, such as:
• giving no information of the source of these numbers.
• giving no information on how the "average" was computed.
• ignoring the inferential status of this statistic (that is, not accounting for inflation and changes in costs of living). Ed presents this statistic in an unclear way that will mislead listeners.
• Ed's use of this statistic to "prove" his case against a federal minimum wage.