There are other comments in this thread about Pareto. Personally, I think it's a very different distribution because its basically misleading. The very vast maj

There are other comments in this thread about Pareto. Personally, I think it's a very different distribution because its basically misleading. The very vast majority the 608 million "farms" are the equivalent of a small house and a yard. There may be more classic Pareto distribution if you change the statistics - basically the title and newspaper article are misleading in trying to point out inequality. Its a trap. Advocates of Pareto like to downplay inequality by invoking Pareto distributions as being "natural". Both points of view are flawed in this specific case (but are valid in other cases) because the statistics don't mean much - it's like playing a rigged casino game against a player where it's the house that wins.