Complex Systems
1. 43% of the top 1% live in DC Metropolitan Area (this is why the counties is pretty important. If 43% of the richest 1%, between places like NY Met and San Fran Met areas, I doubt either one of those contains >40% of the top 1%)
Whether or not that is dubious is not really the point, the point is such a situation is at least
possible, even if it doesn't seem all that plausible. 43% does not convey the same level of confidence as, say, 57%. And nobody should hold it past Stossel that he would completely ignore it if New York City had a percentage equal to or larger than Washington DC.
Quote:
There is no claim here made as to who earns this money, whether or not it's government officials, lobbyists, etc. I have no doubt that a fair share of politicians make up the top 1%.
There is no
claim being made, but it's disingenous to assert that Stossel isn't at least trying to leave an
impression that civil servants are a substantial proportion of this. Which is the probable reason he mentioned the amount of average salary just after this. At the rhetorical level, he's looking for a cheap
reductio ad absurdum for talking about the 1% at all.
Of course, if he's not addressing the question of how the 1% in the DC area breaks down, it's probably for a reason. Also, it would be interesting how many of the people in question are part of the so-called military-industrial complex as opposed to merely civilian concerns.
It would also be instructive to focus on the places where, say, 90% of the civil servants live and see how this compares to the whole of the 14 surrounding counties.
Quote:
Yes, there is a difference between the median and the mean here, but that's irrelevant given the claim about the top 1% living in the region.
Actually, for Stossel to quote the figure is irrelevant in the first place, since merely citing a mean, in and of itself, gives us no useful information on the distribution within what category is being measured. But he's counting on the average (!) reader to pass over this and draw the conclusions that Stossel's stacking of the deck were meant to incline him to believe.
Quote:
Average government salaries are still $80,000+, compared to a private salaries of $50,000+.
There's also more proportion of unionized workers in the public sector than in the private sector, if memory serves right.
Additionally, it's insufficient merely to compare public sector salaries to private sector ones. It would also help enormously if public sector salaries in the US were compared to other industrialized countries, etc. But then again, when the United States is compared in such a way, more often than not, the relative niggardliness of the American welfare state, regulations, or whatever, becomes apparent.
Quote:
3. The argument that 43% of the top 1% live in DC, and the claim that the average total compensation is $120,000 are mutually exclusive besides to a secondary claim that DC has a lot of glut associated with it.
Therefore, while the DC metropolitan area might not have the richest of the top 1%, I think that given that the metropolitan area has >40% of the top 1%, it is hard to claim other metropolitan areas have just as large amount of the top 1%.
Yes, but unless they are ruled out, it's a mere assumption, and it still doesn't change the fact that Stossel can't even be bothered to prove what the title of his article claims is the case. And yes, I do expect the title of something to have a bearing on what it sets out to deal with, especially if it's phrased as an explicit claim.
200
200
200
