didn't know it was that bad. the united states needs to get its shit together

that's a very flawed way of defining poverty. in poor countries, where the median is just barely enough to survive, being at 70% of the median income might mean greater poverty and hardship than being at 40% of the median in a rich country where the median equals a comfortable, middle-class lifestyle.

for example, this chart says that only 7 percent of the Czechs live in poverty according to this definition, while 18% of the US population does. I reaaaaaally doubt that poverty in the US is more widespread than in the Czech Republic, or that the poor segments of the population in CZ are better off than the poor segments of the US population.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 21 2019 05:22am

Which is perfectly logical since you are ignoring, once again, the rate.
Wealth inequalities also increase it.

Btw lets stay positive:

https://ourworldindata.org/exports/share-suffering-from-drug-use-disorders_v4_850x600.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate#/media/File:Prisoners_world_map_png2.png





This graph perfectly expose the inequality rate.
Not taking you in any kind of reference regarding poverty measurements since the day of your dramatic " ocasio cortez rent " fail.


This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Mar 21 2019 04:59am

don't even have to click the link to know #1 is white nationalism

no, it does not. countries with a healthy middle class tend to have high median incomes, and only countries with a high median income can even allow for a significant share of their population to be far below the median income and still survive.
with half the median income in france/germany/united states, you will have a shitty life and struggle a lot, but you will survive. with half the median in Czechia, Russia, India and so on, you will simply starve to death.

furthermore, regional variation contributes to this specific statistic. in a huge and diverse country like the united states, you have both large regions of affluence with high income levels, like the Bos-Wash corridor, and you have large regions of deprivation, like much of the rural south. the rich regions push the national median up, even though the cost of living in these regions is through the roof as well. therefore, you'd have to use a price-level-adjusted average when computing the national median in order to arrive at a statistic that accurately reflects reality. in smaller, more homogeneous countries, this intra-national variation doesnt distort the statistic as much.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 21 2019 05:18am

'counters' a graph about poverty with even more evidence of the ridiculous economic inequality. absolute genius...

Well, we're not socialist.

You quickly jumped from OECD to World level comparisons (including India)