Anonymous #1 9w

The $31,800 comes from the modern updated “poverty line” of $ 15,900. In 2011, it was $10,890. So approximately 50% of Americans in 2011 made less than $21,780.

1

Anonymous #1 9w

You are free to provide sources supporting your dissatisfaction with my claim. I’m waiting

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

I never said your statistic was incorrect. I’m simply pointing out that if you’re making an argument you shouldn’t use out of date information.

0

Anonymous #1 9w

And I informed you that I used modern dollars to adjust for inflation so….

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

What was the original argument you were presenting this information for? The post you reposted is unavailable so I can’t really get the whole context

1

Anonymous #1 9w

They said “it is normal to make $100,000 and calling anyone who makes that much rich was idiotic”

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

And I’m assuming the point you were making was that, no, according to this 2011 report, half of Americans make less than 31,000$ per year, thereby arguing against the persons assertion that 100k+ is normal?

1

Anonymous #1 9w

The source actually claimed “50% of American live below 200% of the the poverty line” and in 2011 that would have been $21,780. Today that is $31,800

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

What’s confusing about both your language here and in the initial post is your use of 2011. If you’re arguing that, in 2026, it’s a huge stretch to say that 100k is a common income, why use metrics from 2011? Your quote makes it seem that, in 2011, 50% of Americans made less than 31k since the paper making that statement was published then.

1

Anonymous #1 9w

I’m confident that others will be able to understand the conversion to modern dollars

1

Anonymous #1 9w

Even if half of Americans lived below 2x the poverty line in 2011 (making less than 42k per household of four, twice line of 21k), there’s no guarantee that the trend would continue into 2026. Doubling the current line (~31k -> 62k) only captures about 37% of 2024 households, clearly illustrating that you can’t assert a trend from 2011 will continue into the present.

0

Anonymous #1 9w

In fact, for 2024, more households had an income of over 100k (about 42.7%) compared to those below twice the poverty line (37% made less than 62k). The remainder is split between those making in between 62,000 - 99,999 per year. As a result, 2024 median income is actually pretty to 100,000, at about 84k. Since census results show a roughly consistent trend of increasing household income over time, OOP may be closer to being correct than expected.

0

Anonymous #1 9w

Sources or nah?

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Sure! Page 16, Table A-2 of the “Income in the United States: 2024” by the US Census Bureau. Should be under “Households by Total Money Income, Race, and Hispanic Origin of Householder: 1967 - 2024”. Look at the very first row, which contains data on household income for 2024 (All Races). My numbers may be 1-2% off since I rounded when adding distributions

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

It might be easier in the future to just say “According to the US census Bureau, less than half of the US population makes more than 100k”. Pretty confident we haven’t seen an 8% jump in 100k earning households in the last two years so it’s probably true. Regardless, it’s a lot more succinct and still gets the same point across.

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Lmk what you think and if you have any questions

0

Anonymous #1 9w

Damn they got real quiet once the source came out

3

Anonymous #2 9w

Their stats are excluding millions of incarcerated people and I’m done entertaining #1’s poor shaming

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Its interesting that your claim for the median wage also includes people that dont work

1

Anonymous #2 9w

Not people to you huh?

1

Anonymous #2 9w

Also there is a shit ton of labor done by incarcerated people. Including working the cafeterias at my school

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Including incarcerated people would actually support your point since they would increase then population who make less than 100k. I’m not sure why you’re upset about something that would help prove your point.

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Besides that, the US census report does NOT include incarcerated populations. According to the Census bureau, “Official estimates of income and poverty for the incarcerated population are not produced or released by the U.S. Census Bureau. Median household income is limited to the household population, so it excludes the incarcerated population.”

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

So I’m not sure where you’re getting that information. Either you didn’t bother reading the source I provided or you’re just being antagonistic. Maybe you just don’t want to have your ideas challenged because it makes you uncomfortable. Idk, but it doesn’t reflect well on your intelligence either way.

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

#2 is correct. Your source also uses data on household/householder income to make its metrics. You’re not really in a position to argue this moral point when you’re guilty of doing the same thing you accuse us of.

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Another interesting point: this survey and metric were determined the year after the Great Recession began to end. So obviously the number of Americans making less than the poverty line would be high. Since economic conditions have drastically changed, theres even more reasons why the reports trend should continue today.

0

Anonymous #1 9w

*not continue typo Mb

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

If you have any more questions lmk. But I would actually read the source before instead of just spouting nonsense

0

Anonymous #2 9w

He’s not the brightest bulb in the box. Probably one of the dimmer ones actually

0

Anonymous #1 9w

I said you were excluding

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Oooooof my bad lol 😛. That’ll teach me to read slower. Regardless, your data also excludes incarcerated people, so this is a pot calling the kettle black scenario

0

Anonymous #1 9w

You’re incorrect in your claim that most people make over $31,000. It is obvious you have disdain for the poor and I bet you are the Oop that my post was referring to. Get banned poor shamer

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

Are you being intentionally dense towards median income statistics?

1

Anonymous #2 9w

Shut up poor hater

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 9w

It seems like you’re getting a bit confused. Let me help: my point that I’ve been making is that your source only establishes a relationship in 2011. You can’t extrapolate that trend a decade into the future without modern evidence illustrating it holds. Evidence which you haven’t provided. I’ve used 2024 census data to show that half of the US no longer falls under your established baseline. Criticizing me personally doesn’t address the gap in your argument.

1

Anonymous #2 9w

I think he just doesn’t care and wants to be right, even though data shows the trend he spouts no longer applies.

0