On Jan 21, 2014 5:36 PM, "Rich Thomas" <richthomas79td...@constructivity.net> wrote: > > But they don't say which half, either. It can't be the top half, so it must be somewhere below the top 85 people, and probably below the top few million at least.
Has to be the bottom half. If it was half in the middle then they'd drop out the bottom and say 60% or whatever. It is a marketing study for Oxfam (if I can believe that part of the article) so higher numbers are better. I am not surprised that X of the wealthiest people in the world have more resources than Y% at the bottom, that is just definition. I could conceive of a series of shocking headlines based on these numbers, and X=85 and Y=50 don't seem unbelievable - but then, if you told me X=1 and Y=90 I don't have any reason to disbelieve that, either. I'm just observing that, at least in this report, the headline is not supported by the text, so my inclination is to doubt the accuracy of the rest of the writeup. Maybe if I get stuck waiting for something tomorrow I'll see if I can dig up the original report, which presumably won't make this kind of simple error. Best, Tim Especially hates when reports mix up wealth and income, not that it applies here. _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
