|
| ▲ | ryandrake 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I guess it's just always important/helpful to keep in mind that the average is almost certainly going to be misleading when the distribution is extremely skewed, as is the case for household income. It's usually a mistake to talk about averages in these cases, when the median is almost always going to be more meaningful. |
| |
| ▲ | danwills 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Agree, but can't we just include both average _and_ mean? And maybe min/max while we're at it? Seems like that could give a much clearer picture (without even needing a graph!?) | | |
| ▲ | tsimionescu 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Min & max are also meaningless for most distributions, so probably you should instead look at P1 and P99 or something, and all of a sudden you're now talking about 5 numbers when all you wanted was a quick point. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | vintermann 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The average Amazon spending of a US household, not the Amazon spending of the average US household. That second one gets weird. |
| |
| ▲ | twoodfin 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I’d be comfortable assuming household income and household Amazon spend are highly correlated. |
|
