> Saying "non-uniform distribution" doesn't actually purvey any insight or mathematical "truth" and reveals almost nothing about the actual distribution - other

> Saying "non-uniform distribution" doesn't actually purvey any insight or mathematical "truth" and reveals almost nothing about the actual distribution - other than stating that it's non-uniform (well, duh!). I'm not sure if you're aware, but you're arguing my point. Without contextualizing the numbers, the headline tells us only that not everybody has the same amount of X. > It shows just how grossly wealth is increasingly captured by a small amount of people. The sloganeering and lack of explaining which numbers qualify as "gross" and which as acceptible and worth striving for under headlines like this is precisely what I'm criticizing. Is it still gross inequality if the top 10% own 60% of wealth? 50%? 20%?