3 ms·
You are maybe thinking that it is difficult to identify powerlaws? (EDIT: s/identify/statistically verify/; s/powerlaws/TRUE powerlaws/) But look: http://globa
by crasshopper 14y ago
You are maybe thinking that it is difficult to identify powerlaws? (EDIT: s/identify/statistically verify/; s/powerlaws/TRUE powerlaws/)
But look: http://globalrichlist.com/how.html http://globalrichlist.com/how.html The bulk is indeed powerlaw.
Maybe you are thinking that a sufficiently winsorised US income distribution is lognormal.
- Dn_Ab 14y agoTo the contrary I think people are too eager to find scale free and power law phenomena. There are several papers discussing log-normal bulk and then power law tail. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2002/feb/26/the-physics-of-personal-income http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2002/feb/26/the-phy... http://fmwww.bc.edu/ec-p/wp671.pdf http://fmwww.bc.edu/ec-p/wp671.pdf and more For what it's worth my initial statement was meant to hold beyond income and wealth and generalize to say achievement and productivity and so a lognormal assumption was fitting as the distribution to pick. It also chimed well with grandalf's statement on how advantages multiply.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]