The mean is a bad metric for the reason I showed above. The median of the quintile is the decile which I was unable to find. However, if I chose the decile, you

The mean is a bad metric for the reason I showed above. The median of the quintile is the decile which I was unable to find. However, if I chose the decile, you'd make the same complaint you're making now that it's the highest of that group, so somehow inadmissible as evidence.. As such, the quintile, which is also a median (of the bottom 40%), is a good measure. Plus I presented data for it - if you want another metric show the data. Another quite relevant factor, as I showed above, is as boomers retire, the bottom gets pulled down by people that are not poor. Given that this demographic has swelled the ranks of the bottom quintile over the recent decades, that the pay has slightly increased means for the truly poor the pay has increased even more than listed in this number. The evidence from the BLS I gave above shows that the mean income in the bottom quintile is ~$11K, but the mean expenditures are ~$25k. This is because of retirees, as can be found in Census and BLS reports with some digging. Factor that in :)