I don't see where I said it did. You didn't answer my question.
EDIT: Forty-some percent of Americans don't have the cash on hand or free credit to handle an unexpected $400 expense. [0] That statistic is almost 3 years old. I doubt it's gone down in that time.
[0] http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jun/09/...
Re:Income Inequality (2016)
by skookumchuck on Monday March 05, 2018 @04:40PM
(#16524711)
I am addressing the income inequality issue. It doesn't need to apply to 100% of the population to be effective.
How is a thing which half the population doesn't have the disposable income to participate in "effective" in addressing income inequality?
Re:Income Inequality (2016)
by skookumchuck on Monday March 05, 2018 @05:00PM
(#16524863)
The survey is classic selection bias.
Anyhow, it does not distinguish between "has no discretionary income" from "spent every dime they have". The latter is a common problem even among higher income folks.
People seem to be able to find the funds to buy iphones/booze/drugs/airjordans even down to the lowest levels.
This country does not consist of 1% super rich and 99% who do not have even $100.