3 ms·
No, chmod600 was referring to income, as can be seen from his post: "$190k/yr as a successful tradesman during boom time. The former will count as "poor" and t
by rsj_hn 5y ago
No, chmod600 was referring to income, as can be seen from his post:
"$190k/yr as a successful tradesman during boom time. The former will count as "poor" and the latter will count as "top 10%[..].
In other words, no, it's not comparing Americans of different classes. It's comparing Americans at different stages of life. Or just the ebb and flow of income over and individual's life"
You may want to talk about something else, of course, but my reply was to standardUser arguing that chmod600's data was wrong, when in fact he was absolutely right.
- sudosysgen 5y agoChmod600 was trying to refute the headline, which talked about wealth. If he used income metrics to refute it then he is wrong. He was using the incorrect data set and applying it to the article, so the objection is correct.