Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Unemployment-discuss
Comments
-
Are you arguing he should use average? Given that income of the top 1% has increased much faster than everyone else. I'm not sure that will work out in your favor.PurpleThrobber said:
That's some spectacular Cuog mathUWhuskytskeet said:
Median household income in constant 2012 dollars is higher now than it was in the 80's (though it has decreased since the recession).PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
To find the Median, place the numbers you are given in value order and find the middle number.
Example: find the Median of {13, 23, 11, 16, 15, 10, 26}.
Put them in order: {10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26}
The middle number is 15, so the median is 15.
Let's keep it simple to show what a deceptive pile of shit you are spewing forth:
1980 median: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
2012 median 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 -
What part of math do you hate?UWhuskytskeet said:
Jesus Christ, is everyone here fucking retarded?PurpleThrobber said:
That's some spectacular Cuog mathUWhuskytskeet said:
Median household income in constant 2012 dollars is higher now than it was in the 80's (though it has decreased since the recession).PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
To find the Median, place the numbers you are given in value order and find the middle number.
Example: find the Median of {13, 23, 11, 16, 15, 10, 26}.
Put them in order: {10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26}
The middle number is 15, so the median is 15.
Let's keep it simple to show what a deceptive pile of shit you are spewing forth:
1980 median: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
2012 median 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
I illustrated very clearly how your 2012 median is higher. Kudos.
-
Please refrain from using the R word. Thanks.UWhuskytskeet said:
Jesus Christ, is everyone here fucking retarded?PurpleThrobber said:
That's some spectacular Cuog mathUWhuskytskeet said:
Median household income in constant 2012 dollars is higher now than it was in the 80's (though it has decreased since the recession).PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
To find the Median, place the numbers you are given in value order and find the middle number.
Example: find the Median of {13, 23, 11, 16, 15, 10, 26}.
Put them in order: {10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26}
The middle number is 15, so the median is 15.
Let's keep it simple to show what a deceptive pile of shit you are spewing forth:
1980 median: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
2012 median 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 -
It's retarded because this shit is readily available. Everyone here would rather argue about imaginary figures instead of just looking it up.PurpleThrobber said:
What part of math do you hate?
I illustrated very clearly how your 2012 median is higher. Kudos.
Here are mean household income figures in 2013 dollars:
Source: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/
You guys are lucky I don't feel like doing shit at work today. -
Here is a closer look at the bottom two quintiles since that is what was questioned in the median income chart:
-
Ignore the CPI index discussion (that's an entire discussion that makes comparing data across large time gaps hard)...the plot shows median incomes were going up in the 80s and have been going down (now flat) under Obama. They go up because the jobs being created are those above the previous median, they go down because the jobs being created are below the median.UWhuskytskeet said:
Median household income in constant 2012 dollars is higher now than it was in the 80's (though it has decreased since the recession).PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
Not sure what your point is but its a good graph.
-
Are you new here?UWhuskytskeet said:
Jesus Christ, is everyone here fucking retarded?PurpleThrobber said:
That's some spectacular Cuog mathUWhuskytskeet said:
Median household income in constant 2012 dollars is higher now than it was in the 80's (though it has decreased since the recession).PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
To find the Median, place the numbers you are given in value order and find the middle number.
Example: find the Median of {13, 23, 11, 16, 15, 10, 26}.
Put them in order: {10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26}
The middle number is 15, so the median is 15.
Let's keep it simple to show what a deceptive pile of shit you are spewing forth:
1980 median: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
2012 median 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 -
Wait. What?RaceBannon said:
And that has what to do with you being a liar?pawz said:
I seem to remember the methodology changing as recently as the October before Obama's re-election.2001400ex said:
Same methodology as when Reagan was president.PurpleThrobber said:
You mean all the people who quit trying to find work and are no longer counted? So there's that.2001400ex said:
Don't forget labor participation rates while you gurgle on Reagan's ballzak.PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
Except @HoustonHusky thinks the formula changed drastically, when really it didn't. There's been minor changes, but nothing that significantly impacts the number.
-
I wasn't aware that the sample size of American households was 13.PurpleThrobber said:
That's some spectacular Cuog mathUWhuskytskeet said:
Median household income in constant 2012 dollars is higher now than it was in the 80's (though it has decreased since the recession).PurpleThrobber said:Reagan's employed were making middle class living wage incomes.
Obama's employed are slightly above the poverty line.
To find the Median, place the numbers you are given in value order and find the middle number.
Example: find the Median of {13, 23, 11, 16, 15, 10, 26}.
Put them in order: {10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 23, 26}
The middle number is 15, so the median is 15.
Let's keep it simple to show what a deceptive pile of shit you are spewing forth:
1980 median: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
2012 median 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
-
Liars figure and figures lie
Can we get back to side and under boobs please?
