LogFAQs > #913917744

Anti-245 posted...

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/01/how-wealth-inequality-has-changed-in-the-u-s-since-the-great-recession-by-race-ethnicity-and-income/

I don't care for demos or forbes enough to give them clicks, but this analysis and more importantly the underlying data when coupled with the Nielsen data I provided earlier in the thread all show a very different narrative than the one you've been peddling.

For example, consider how the poorest region of the country is the south. It's the region where the value of before-tax income for families with assets has historically been the lowest of any region. And that is where most black people live. And a lot of white people who are on welfare. It's almost as if living in an economically depressed region of the country, like the south or rust belt in the midwest, is not good for someone's wealth.

Also consider that the median value of net worth for families with holdings per age group shows that the age group with the lowest wealth is in the 35 to 44 range. Guess where the black working class fits into that? It's largely a very young population that has yet to enter its peak earning potential.

The amount of data in the underlying federal reserve report is truly massive and can be analyzed in so many ways. It's still ultimately silly to offer hot takes like "whites own 90% of everything" as if that means anything. The majority of whites don't own anything. It's ultimately the wealthiest top 1% of the top 1% that own a massive amount of the current wealth in the system.

I'd usually be happy to dig in and provide a lot of context but I'm afraid you've shown that you're just a low-effort troll.