4 ms·
No this is not correct. Half of us will always be below the mean, this much is true, but we can obviously do something about the spread of the distribution.
by alexanderchr 3y ago
No this is not correct. Half of us will always be below the mean, this much is true, but we can obviously do something about the spread of the distribution.
- BurningFrog 3y agoDepends on if you think people care about their place in the social ranking, which is what I thought of, or if it is their wealth compared to the average, which is maybe your theory. There is probably some of both, now that I think of it.
- alexanderchr 3y agoI see where you're coming from. I think that wealth compared to the average is more important because it's so hard to place oneself in the social ranking when much of it is driven by priorities. For example where I live it wouldn't be unusual for an electrician to drive a nicer car than a doctor. On the other hand they might spend less on vacations. But as long as most people are somewhat close to the mean I think they are not so concerned about precisely where in the ranking they are. At least compared to a world where some people live like serfs while the upper middle class can afford drivers, maids and cooks.