Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GCSE maths, averages and politics

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    GCSE maths, averages and politics

    Okay - I might be about to appear humongously thick, here, but I don't care. I have to ask this question as it is something that eternally perplexes and outrages me.

    Why, when talking about such things as average wages, do politicians always refer to *mean* averages?

    I know that using the median average for such things would be pointless, stupid and near-impossible, but surely shouldn't they be compelled to use the *modal* average for such important statistics as average wage?

    Using the mean average amounts to gross misrepresentation, IMHO.

    #2
    GCSE maths, averages and politics

    I think you're answered your own question in the last sentence there, Clive.

    Comment


      #3
      GCSE maths, averages and politics

      The "modal" average wage in the UK would be zero. Very close to half of adults in the UK are either retired, not working through choice, or not working and claiming benefits.

      The modal test batting average is zero, as well.

      Comment


        #4
        GCSE maths, averages and politics

        evilC wrote: Why, when talking about such things as average wages, do politicians always refer to *mean* averages?
        [...]
        Using the mean average amounts to gross misrepresentation, IMHO.
        Because the exorbitant wages of a happy few will drastically distort the mean average wage to make it look higher. It is misrepresentation, and politicians do it either because they benefit from this misrepresentation, or because they do not know any better.

        Comment


          #5
          GCSE maths, averages and politics

          I think most politicians are too maths-ignorant to know the difference. But the people who feed them the data largely benefit from the idea of a higher "average" income, to give the impression that everyone is rich, and to create a public impression of a baseline much higher than it should be for where progressivity in taxation really kicks in.

          So, for "average wage", they'll often give you the mean wage of full time earners. Which not only creates an artificial weighting from the people who make millions off dividends and capital gains; but also removes the lowest earners who can only find occasional part time work.

          Median income is a much, much better number for determining what an "average" person earns.

          Comment


            #6
            GCSE maths, averages and politics

            The median wage in the UK is about 75% of the mean, such is the skew in the distribution. So you'll hear that "average" salaries now are about £33,000, while you'll also hear that "median" salaries are about £26,000.

            One agreed definition of a child in "poverty" used to be one being brought up in a household with total earnings less than 60% of the median of a single-earner household. That never made sense to me, because a) if you increased everyone's income by 5%, you'd still have the same proportion of people in "poverty" and b) 60% of the median wage in the UK is still higher than being on benefits. I wouldn't automatically describe everyone in work but above the benefit line (or indeed everyone on benefits) as being in "poverty", that seems a bit dramatic.

            Comment


              #7
              GCSE maths, averages and politics

              Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote: The "modal" average wage in the UK would be zero. Very close to half of adults in the UK are either retired, not working through choice, or not working and claiming benefits.

              The modal test batting average is zero, as well.
              Not trying to be overly picky here, as I understand your logic and realise it is sound, but doesn't the term 'wage' imply that you are working? Thus all non-working people (for whatever reason) would be excluded from such figures by default?

              Comment


                #8
                GCSE maths, averages and politics

                Particularly if the sample is restricted to those in full time employment, which, as LLR notes, is usually the case.

                Though I've always thought medians are much more informative than modes (or means, for that matter) for this kind of measure.

                Modes are often rather freakish. For example, the modal price for consumer goods in the US may well be USD 0.99, simply due to the prevalence of "dollar stores".

                Comment


                  #9
                  GCSE maths, averages and politics

                  Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote: The "modal" average wage in the UK would be zero. Very close to half of adults in the UK are either retired, not working through choice, or not working and claiming benefits.

                  The modal test batting average is zero, as well.
                  I would lay good money that the zero wage earners are not part of the mean and medium calcs either. Or those on whatever unemployment benefit is called nowadays.

                  Edit - really must read the thread before commenting. Or else I end up just repeating people. Repeating people.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X