3 ms·
>That study defines “elite” as the top 10% of income earners The study does not define elite that way, it simply notes that the likelihood of a policy being im
by pydry 1y ago
>That study defines “elite” as the top 10% of income earners
The study does not define elite that way, it simply notes that the likelihood of a policy being implemented trends upward with income.
>that is consistent with my point that knowledge workers have lots of political power.
I cant see anything on this reddit thread which indicates this.
>Also, Vox did a piece discussing subsequent research that suggests
Im sure they did. It's not unusual for corporate backed think tanks to push back on studies which run counter to their narrative. The same thing happened with r>g, minimum wage increases across state borders, etc.
- rayiner 1y agoThe quote from the paper on the reddit thread discusses dividing people into income quintiles. I assume you actually read the paper and understand the methodology?
- pydry 1y agoIt showed a direct correlation between income and your impact on policy. It would, alas, be scientifically illiterate to assume that since they divided the public into 10 quintiles that the correlation suddenly stopped above the 90.1% threshold. And, it would be regular old illitetate to assume that crossing from 89.9% to 90% puts you firmly in the cateogory of "elite" because of how a study divided up income quintiles. There is a difference between a true elite (e.g. gets put in charge of a government department of your own creation) and somebody who just earns a lot of money and generally benefits from tax breaks lobbied for by those elites.