2 ms·
I'm surprised no one has pointed out the giant negative spike in the last column. It effectively says that the poor are spending (ie, consuming) more than they
by sanj 19y ago
I'm surprised no one has pointed out the giant negative spike in the last column.
It effectively says that the poor are spending (ie, consuming) more than they make to maintain their standard of living. So, yes, consumption is the same, but the cost is a mortgaged future or a edifice that crumbles the first time anyone is seriously sick.
Further, it seems strange that the values are absolute. I'd like to see them as a percentage of income.
- sanj 19y agoI created a Google Spreadsheet with the data, and the pre/post-tax percentages: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p-dY8J8J_WREnyO8P_QLqBQ http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p-dY8J8J_WREnyO8P_QLq... Interesting point: the lowest fifth use 60% of their post-tax income for housing. Add in food, and you're up to 95%. Add together the trio of "food, shelter and clothing" and you're over their income.
- ks 19y agoAnd don't forget health care. I bet most would trade their DVD player for better health care