3 ms·
>Consumers in the top 10% of the income distribution accounted for 49.2% of total spending, per Bloomberg. What was the historical trend? Otherwise you can't d
by gruez 11mo ago
>Consumers in the top 10% of the income distribution accounted for 49.2% of total spending, per Bloomberg.
What was the historical trend? Otherwise you can't draw much from just "49.2%" alone, aside from a vague sense that stuff should be fairer.
- johnnyanmac 11mo ago> What was the historical trend? No, it is not normal for 10% of the coountry to power half the spending. Just think about that statistic for a second. Spending includes groceries, services, and other continual needs. A few private jets can't outspend millions of people buying food. But here's your chart: https://preview.redd.it/2pcvmm0u3jpf1.png?width=798&auto=webp&s=d34c476500ba3ab02e5711167e67fe320dae84f6 https://preview.redd.it/2pcvmm0u3jpf1.png?width=798&auto=web...
- gruez 11mo ago>No, it is not normal for 10% of the coountry to power half the spending. Yet, if you look at your chart, it was 40% in 1989s and have been slowly edging up. While 40% is a smaller number than 50%, you can make the same argument about 40% not being "normal", yet society has been chugging along just fine.