Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Badger
“Especially in 2000, the greens-the color of money–grow much darker. It seems the rich simply got richer.”

Actually, there isn't enough information to conclude that the “rich simply got richer” — unless you're using a strictly relative measure of “richer”.

According to the legend, the graphic is based on the median income in the metro area. If you lower that median income, by substituting middle income families, with low income families, then a higher-income family that remains, will have a higher relative income — without needing to actually have more income. They will be “relatively” richer — but, not necessarily having more income.

10 posted on 04/03/2014 10:01:28 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA (You don't really need a sarcasm tag here, do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
According to the legend, the graphic is based on the median income in the metro area. If you lower that median income, by substituting middle income families, with low income families, then a higher-income family that remains, will have a higher relative income — without needing to actually have more income. They will be “relatively” richer — but, not necessarily having more income.

More than anything, it's that the median income gray areas are evaporating and being replaced by green/brick red colors (the extreme opposites of the spectrum).

26 posted on 04/03/2014 10:57:50 AM PDT by IYAS9YAS (Has anyone seen my tagline? It was here yesterday. I seem to have misplaced it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson