I think Glenn's point about using the median is that the numbers are close to zero at the 50th percentile. If the numbers are, say, $100 and $1, the media will headline "100 times more." At the 40th percentile, both likely have negative net worth. At the 60th, the numbers might be, say, $500 and $300, which yields a vastly lower percentage/multiple.
I too was a little confused by the reference to the upper portions of the wealth distribution. I casually wrote it off by filing it under "long tail of the distribution curve."
So I guess if we looked at say the 99th percentile or even the 99.9th percentile, I imagine the white to Black wealth ratio would be significantly higher than 10 to 1? But got it regarding African American household wealth being close to 0 around the median. (I thought I remembered it being in the low 4 figures maybe, but I can't recall exactly.)
I think Glenn's point about using the median is that the numbers are close to zero at the 50th percentile. If the numbers are, say, $100 and $1, the media will headline "100 times more." At the 40th percentile, both likely have negative net worth. At the 60th, the numbers might be, say, $500 and $300, which yields a vastly lower percentage/multiple.
I too was a little confused by the reference to the upper portions of the wealth distribution. I casually wrote it off by filing it under "long tail of the distribution curve."
So I guess if we looked at say the 99th percentile or even the 99.9th percentile, I imagine the white to Black wealth ratio would be significantly higher than 10 to 1? But got it regarding African American household wealth being close to 0 around the median. (I thought I remembered it being in the low 4 figures maybe, but I can't recall exactly.)