So while the poor got poorer, the rich got even richer than that.
This is why average is a shit metric for this.
Well, the mean is a bad average to use. The median would be an average more representative of the general population.
But they did use median.
Oh. Good.
You have GOT to be fucking with me.
I mean, I think I might be able to decipher what you might be trying to say but you typed the sentence "the mean is a bad average to use."
You know mean and average are synonyms... right?
Edit: My wife has just informed me that an article off Google says that in Finance and Sports Statistics, the term Average is used synonymous with Descriptive Statistics.
Having worked as a statistician in the past, my firm knowledge was that Mean/Average, median, mode, count, and range together form the family of Descriptive Statistics.
This hurts my brain so bad...
There are really people out there calling Descriptive Statistics and Averages synonyms? Do those people never use average to mean mean? Or do they use Average to mean both mean and Descriptive Statistic.
My brain is word souping so hard.
Mean is one type of average. Median and mode are other types of average, so there’s nothing incorrect about saying “mean is a bad average” since it differentiates “mean” from “median” and “mode.”
I did an edit acknowledging this and I am struggling HARD to accept it.
By your rules, Average has no less that 7 meanings.
By your rules, average is a useless word that doesn't really convey anything.
But I am on notice that a lot of people are buying into this.
Please answer for me though. In your mind, is average one of the 5+ kinds of averages? Or do you only refer to mean when you are referencing that... (I really hate conceding that this is a thing) "average".
To repeat. For over 20 years, in my world, mean and average mean "a set of values added together and divided by the count of values", and mean/average, median, mode, range, and count are Descriptive Statistics. So when I say "average", you know what I just said. I didn't just say a meaningless thing (seemingly to waste time and be confusing to understand) that requires me to specify if I meant mean, median, mode, range, or count.
lol at calling wikipedia “your rules” as if I have any ownership of that website.
I never said averages have different meanings. I said there are different types of averages. You really jumped to the weirdest conclusion here. It’s as if I say “there are multiple types of shapes: squares, circles, triangles, etc” and you reply “by your rules, shape has no less than 7 meanings.” No, that’s not what was said and certainly not what was meant to be implied at all.
And to answer your question, specificity isn’t always required, so it’s perfectly acceptable to use the more vague term at times. Other times, it creates confusion or ambiguity, so it’s better to use a more specific word. If someone said “average,” I’d probably assume they meant the most common type of average: mean. That might be a wrong assumption, but thats just how words work. Some are more specific than others.
Okay. You wholesale skipped my question.
I am asking you, is average one of the 5 core, gulp, averages?
I answered your question in a quick edit. Quit acting like this case is in any way unique. You’re just looking for any excuse to object to this widely accepted broader definition of the word.
Last question, because I am mentally screaming and need to make an apt pun:
Why don't you just say what you mean?
lol at your pun, but is your solution really to stop using “average” all together?
But it’s ok. I do understand the etymological frustration that you’re feeling, but I gotta say just take a step back from your preconceived notions and think if what you’re saying would make sense when applying it more broadly.
If you think we should simply say what we mean, should we remove all broader terms if there are already more specific words? Should we stop referring to dogs and cats as pets or animals or mammals when they already have more specific names? No, because you can refer to a group of cats and dogs as a group of animals (or as mammals to differentiate them from birds or as pets to differentiate them from wild animals). Similarly, you can generalize and speak about all averages together at once. See I just did it here, and the person you originally replied to was also using it to speak more broadly and compare/contrast means and medians. It was merely your narrow definition that caused your confusion.
No. My solution is that you, and according to Wikipedia, finance, Sports Statistics, and ESL people add "descriptive statistic" to their vocabulary.
I hear "the average is 7" and until today that means the values summed and divided by the count of values is 7.
So I run with that.
Then when I'm knee deep in shit, you get all weasly and say "what I meant is that the mode was 7".
Because you call mode an average. But to me it's not the average, it's a descriptive statistic called mode.
If you said "the descriptive statistic is 7" I could say immediately "which descriptive statistic" and you would say "mode" and then my course of action wouldn't get me knee deep in shit.
But, to me, your are Weasley and you just pulled the "7 average" out your ass because you can't math.
So you should have said "the mode is 7" or "I flunked basic math, so right here I'm just saying 7, guess what I mean by 7."
I dont know. This whole thing we are talking about feels like it's summarized by the statement: "I am unable to do basic math, but I get paid to do math, so I participate in this weasly little exercise of incorrectly using the word average, and irl, that usually gets the guy who trusted me getting shitcanned and I can still keep saying 'the average is fucked if I know' and I still have my job".
Holy cow. You are really really trying hard to not make sense of this and being incredibly rude. No one said anyone had to add “descriptive statistics” to their vocabulary. The Wikipedia article I linked in no place said average is used for all statistics. You are making that distinction, and it seems wholly incorrect and nonsensical to me, and I do math for a living, so stop with your insulting implication that the only people who could possibly use average to mean anything other than mean must be too stupid to understand math. (And seriously, fuck you for that implication.)
There’s nothing weasily about someone using average to mean mode. You have simply misunderstood the definition of average, and while I’m kindly trying to help you understand, you are making zero attempt to even try. But at this point, I’m out of patience with you annd your lack effort. I’m frankly tired of watching merely trying to find any excuse to reject the broader definition. Get a fucking grip.
I agree with your sentiment, but I'll say I'm in my 30s and in grade school they definitely taught us mean/median/mode as being ways to measure the average. That said, I do also use average to mean mean as that's what something like Excel calls it and that's what most people think of when measuring average unless you specify otherwise. So that's all to say, yeah it's a bit messed up.
Right. The whole linguistic cluster fuck in my head is "mean and average are synonymous, and that measure is a descriptive statistic."
Accepting that average is synonymous with Descriptive statistic, not mean is troubling me.
My real fear is someone who calls a descriptive statistic an average is about to say to me that average and mean are synonyms as well, and that's when I'm ready to flip a table.
Your brain can't be healthy if you call average a descriptive statistic AND a mean.
Just learn the term descriptive statistic. Make your brain healthier. Communicate more efficiently with the world...
Communicating more effectively with the world requires you to meet the world where it's at.
I'd feel you if efficacy and efficiency weren't mutually dependent to me.
I’m with you basically and was also taught average = mean. If you meant median or mode you had to say so. 🤷♀️ This feels like when I learned my blood isn’t blue because it’s deoxygenated lol
Thanks for that.
Genuinely trying to make this a learning moment for me, but I also just can't stop pushing my own point. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one like this.
They used median
The survey showed other stark contrasts. While Black households saw their median income fall by 2% - versus a 3% rise for all families - their median net worth shot up by 60% to outpace all other racial and ethnic groups during those three years
The poor got richer
Despite Black families experiencing the largest growth in median net wealth — a 60% bump from 2019 — their 2022 levels remained the lowest among all other racial or ethnic groups, and they also saw incomes falter.
The 37% rise in net worth, which was more than double the next-largest upswing on record, was largely fueled by asset growth — specifically home values and stock market gains that far exceeded consumer price inflation, Fed researchers said.
Figured_ I would add a bit more context to your argument. You can't gain in net wealth if you have nothing to gain with. Emphasis in above quote is mine.
How the hell do you make less money and increase net worth? Is this only surveying home owners?
Assets ballooned and especially homes
64% of the population owns a house so you don't need to only survey homeowners, they're a big part of the population
Because most people got money from the government during the pandemic.
It says black households, and you said "the poor". I think that's sad.
Well an increase from $1 to $1.60 is richer, I guess. Yay
However: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-income-inequality-rose-3-years-through-2022-fed-data-shows-2023-10-18/
So while the poor got poorer, the rich got even richer than that.
This is why average is a shit metric for this.
Well, the mean is a bad average to use. The median would be an average more representative of the general population.
But they did use median.
Oh. Good.
You have GOT to be fucking with me.
I mean, I think I might be able to decipher what you might be trying to say but you typed the sentence "the mean is a bad average to use."
You know mean and average are synonyms... right?
Edit: My wife has just informed me that an article off Google says that in Finance and Sports Statistics, the term Average is used synonymous with Descriptive Statistics.
Having worked as a statistician in the past, my firm knowledge was that Mean/Average, median, mode, count, and range together form the family of Descriptive Statistics.
This hurts my brain so bad...
There are really people out there calling Descriptive Statistics and Averages synonyms? Do those people never use average to mean mean? Or do they use Average to mean both mean and Descriptive Statistic.
My brain is word souping so hard.
Mean is one type of average. Median and mode are other types of average, so there’s nothing incorrect about saying “mean is a bad average” since it differentiates “mean” from “median” and “mode.”
I did an edit acknowledging this and I am struggling HARD to accept it.
By your rules, Average has no less that 7 meanings.
By your rules, average is a useless word that doesn't really convey anything.
But I am on notice that a lot of people are buying into this.
Please answer for me though. In your mind, is average one of the 5+ kinds of averages? Or do you only refer to mean when you are referencing that... (I really hate conceding that this is a thing) "average".
To repeat. For over 20 years, in my world, mean and average mean "a set of values added together and divided by the count of values", and mean/average, median, mode, range, and count are Descriptive Statistics. So when I say "average", you know what I just said. I didn't just say a meaningless thing (seemingly to waste time and be confusing to understand) that requires me to specify if I meant mean, median, mode, range, or count.
lol at calling wikipedia “your rules” as if I have any ownership of that website.
I never said averages have different meanings. I said there are different types of averages. You really jumped to the weirdest conclusion here. It’s as if I say “there are multiple types of shapes: squares, circles, triangles, etc” and you reply “by your rules, shape has no less than 7 meanings.” No, that’s not what was said and certainly not what was meant to be implied at all.
And to answer your question, specificity isn’t always required, so it’s perfectly acceptable to use the more vague term at times. Other times, it creates confusion or ambiguity, so it’s better to use a more specific word. If someone said “average,” I’d probably assume they meant the most common type of average: mean. That might be a wrong assumption, but thats just how words work. Some are more specific than others.
Okay. You wholesale skipped my question.
I am asking you, is average one of the 5 core, gulp, averages?
I answered your question in a quick edit. Quit acting like this case is in any way unique. You’re just looking for any excuse to object to this widely accepted broader definition of the word.
Last question, because I am mentally screaming and need to make an apt pun:
Why don't you just say what you mean?
lol at your pun, but is your solution really to stop using “average” all together?
But it’s ok. I do understand the etymological frustration that you’re feeling, but I gotta say just take a step back from your preconceived notions and think if what you’re saying would make sense when applying it more broadly.
If you think we should simply say what we mean, should we remove all broader terms if there are already more specific words? Should we stop referring to dogs and cats as pets or animals or mammals when they already have more specific names? No, because you can refer to a group of cats and dogs as a group of animals (or as mammals to differentiate them from birds or as pets to differentiate them from wild animals). Similarly, you can generalize and speak about all averages together at once. See I just did it here, and the person you originally replied to was also using it to speak more broadly and compare/contrast means and medians. It was merely your narrow definition that caused your confusion.
No. My solution is that you, and according to Wikipedia, finance, Sports Statistics, and ESL people add "descriptive statistic" to their vocabulary.
I hear "the average is 7" and until today that means the values summed and divided by the count of values is 7.
So I run with that.
Then when I'm knee deep in shit, you get all weasly and say "what I meant is that the mode was 7".
Because you call mode an average. But to me it's not the average, it's a descriptive statistic called mode.
If you said "the descriptive statistic is 7" I could say immediately "which descriptive statistic" and you would say "mode" and then my course of action wouldn't get me knee deep in shit.
But, to me, your are Weasley and you just pulled the "7 average" out your ass because you can't math.
So you should have said "the mode is 7" or "I flunked basic math, so right here I'm just saying 7, guess what I mean by 7."
I dont know. This whole thing we are talking about feels like it's summarized by the statement: "I am unable to do basic math, but I get paid to do math, so I participate in this weasly little exercise of incorrectly using the word average, and irl, that usually gets the guy who trusted me getting shitcanned and I can still keep saying 'the average is fucked if I know' and I still have my job".
Holy cow. You are really really trying hard to not make sense of this and being incredibly rude. No one said anyone had to add “descriptive statistics” to their vocabulary. The Wikipedia article I linked in no place said average is used for all statistics. You are making that distinction, and it seems wholly incorrect and nonsensical to me, and I do math for a living, so stop with your insulting implication that the only people who could possibly use average to mean anything other than mean must be too stupid to understand math. (And seriously, fuck you for that implication.)
There’s nothing weasily about someone using average to mean mode. You have simply misunderstood the definition of average, and while I’m kindly trying to help you understand, you are making zero attempt to even try. But at this point, I’m out of patience with you annd your lack effort. I’m frankly tired of watching merely trying to find any excuse to reject the broader definition. Get a fucking grip.
I agree with your sentiment, but I'll say I'm in my 30s and in grade school they definitely taught us mean/median/mode as being ways to measure the average. That said, I do also use average to mean mean as that's what something like Excel calls it and that's what most people think of when measuring average unless you specify otherwise. So that's all to say, yeah it's a bit messed up.
Right. The whole linguistic cluster fuck in my head is "mean and average are synonymous, and that measure is a descriptive statistic."
Accepting that average is synonymous with Descriptive statistic, not mean is troubling me.
My real fear is someone who calls a descriptive statistic an average is about to say to me that average and mean are synonyms as well, and that's when I'm ready to flip a table.
Your brain can't be healthy if you call average a descriptive statistic AND a mean.
Just learn the term descriptive statistic. Make your brain healthier. Communicate more efficiently with the world...
Communicating more effectively with the world requires you to meet the world where it's at.
I'd feel you if efficacy and efficiency weren't mutually dependent to me.
I’m with you basically and was also taught average = mean. If you meant median or mode you had to say so. 🤷♀️ This feels like when I learned my blood isn’t blue because it’s deoxygenated lol
Thanks for that.
Genuinely trying to make this a learning moment for me, but I also just can't stop pushing my own point. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one like this.
They used median
The poor got richer
Figured_ I would add a bit more context to your argument. You can't gain in net wealth if you have nothing to gain with. Emphasis in above quote is mine.
How the hell do you make less money and increase net worth? Is this only surveying home owners?
Assets ballooned and especially homes
64% of the population owns a house so you don't need to only survey homeowners, they're a big part of the population
Because most people got money from the government during the pandemic.
It says black households, and you said "the poor". I think that's sad.
Well an increase from $1 to $1.60 is richer, I guess. Yay