4 ms·

And also smaller, that can't be forgotten. Reading this through the lens of income inequality; I don't think having a smaller, yet richer middle class, is nece

And also smaller, that can't be forgotten. Reading this through the lens of income inequality; I don't think having a smaller, yet richer middle class, is necessarily something to be proud of.

pathseeker 7y ago
Eliminating people at the higher income brackets until the average has lowered enough that you have a large middle class isn't something to be proud of either.
- ranie93 7y ago
  Is it? In the scenario you say we shouldn't be necessarily proud of more people would be economically well-off (e.g. less people choosing between food and rent). Are you sure that wouldn't be something to be proud of?
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    The graph has nothing to say about the relative prevalence of people choosing between food and rent.
    - ranie93 7y ago
      I have not read the report entirely so I can't say if it does, but I don't know for a fact either which is why I left it as a parenthetical. I am fine with my comment being interpreted without the parenthetical.
WalterBright 7y ago
According to how the graph was constructed, you can't actually infer that the middle class in the US is smaller, because it defines the middle class as wealthier to begin with.
- ranie93 7y ago
  It seems to me the definition is fair, they define it as 75% to 200% of the median income in the respective country. I don't think this comparison (to ones own countries' median income, PPP-adjusted) can be escaped since "middle-class" is being interpreted as intra-country. This is what I would expect since when I think myself if I qualify as middle-class, I don't compare myself to the Yemenis, I compare myself to other Americans.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    It's adjusted per PPI, which makes the income consistent across countries. PPI adjusted income is essentially a measure of standard of living. So the graph uses different definitions of middle class standard of living and conflates the results. Bluntly, it's lying with statistics.
    - ranie93 7y ago
      Thanks for your reply I am also looking to understand this report further I think I see what you're saying: The prices are already PPP (did you mean that instead of PPI?), thus the _additional_ adjustment of middle class as varying country per country (on a USD value basis) is then misleading/lying. E.g. Someone below the threshold of middle class in the USA may still be considered middle class in Germany. The issue I see specifically is here: >So the graph uses different definitions of middle class standard of living and conflates the results. They use a _consistent_ definition of 75% to 200% (a percent basis) of the median income in each country. What you interpret as different definitions stems from the fact that these countries have different median incomes. And that's the whole point of the category of "middle-class" isn't it? Consider the edge case of some fictional country where their currency is gold bars and diamonds. "In America you'd be rich!" you may tell a middle class member of that country. "That's great, but I'm middle of the road around here actually" Is what they would respond. The fact that a homeless person in the US, with their scant possesions, would maybe be wealthy in Yemen (ignoring the myriad other issues) has no bearing on their current condition in the US. If we compare these countries on a worldwide median household-income basis ($9,733 [1]), almost everyone in the developed world would be "middle-class" or higher. Would that mean there are no issues there? [2] [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-household-income-000.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-househo... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness#Statistics_for_developed_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness#Statistics_for_de...

And also smaller, that can't be forgotten. Reading this through the lens of income inequality; I don't think having a smaller, yet richer middle class, is necessarily something to be proud of.

pathseeker 7y ago

Eliminating people at the higher income brackets until the average has lowered enough that you have a large middle class isn't something to be proud of either.

ranie93 7y ago
Is it? In the scenario you say we shouldn't be necessarily proud of more people would be economically well-off (e.g. less people choosing between food and rent). Are you sure that wouldn't be something to be proud of?
- WalterBright 7y ago
  The graph has nothing to say about the relative prevalence of people choosing between food and rent.
  - ranie93 7y ago
    I have not read the report entirely so I can't say if it does, but I don't know for a fact either which is why I left it as a parenthetical. I am fine with my comment being interpreted without the parenthetical.

WalterBright 7y ago

According to how the graph was constructed, you can't actually infer that the middle class in the US is smaller, because it defines the middle class as wealthier to begin with.

ranie93 7y ago
It seems to me the definition is fair, they define it as 75% to 200% of the median income in the respective country. I don't think this comparison (to ones own countries' median income, PPP-adjusted) can be escaped since "middle-class" is being interpreted as intra-country. This is what I would expect since when I think myself if I qualify as middle-class, I don't compare myself to the Yemenis, I compare myself to other Americans.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  It's adjusted per PPI, which makes the income consistent across countries. PPI adjusted income is essentially a measure of standard of living. So the graph uses different definitions of middle class standard of living and conflates the results. Bluntly, it's lying with statistics.
  - ranie93 7y ago
    Thanks for your reply I am also looking to understand this report further I think I see what you're saying: The prices are already PPP (did you mean that instead of PPI?), thus the _additional_ adjustment of middle class as varying country per country (on a USD value basis) is then misleading/lying. E.g. Someone below the threshold of middle class in the USA may still be considered middle class in Germany. The issue I see specifically is here: >So the graph uses different definitions of middle class standard of living and conflates the results. They use a _consistent_ definition of 75% to 200% (a percent basis) of the median income in each country. What you interpret as different definitions stems from the fact that these countries have different median incomes. And that's the whole point of the category of "middle-class" isn't it? Consider the edge case of some fictional country where their currency is gold bars and diamonds. "In America you'd be rich!" you may tell a middle class member of that country. "That's great, but I'm middle of the road around here actually" Is what they would respond. The fact that a homeless person in the US, with their scant possesions, would maybe be wealthy in Yemen (ignoring the myriad other issues) has no bearing on their current condition in the US. If we compare these countries on a worldwide median household-income basis ($9,733 [1]), almost everyone in the developed world would be "middle-class" or higher. Would that mean there are no issues there? [2] [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-household-income-000.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-househo... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness#Statistics_for_developed_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness#Statistics_for_de...