• huppakee@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 days ago

    There definitely is an edited version out there, but the scientist does propose a novel way to measure poverty. I’m saying this not to argue, but to inform the people who might not open the article because of this comment.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      That was not suggesting a different version of this article, but was more a reference to the fact that the US government has always been less than forthcoming about the true state of the economy and how well people are doing. A classic example would be how many people are underemployed but are still counted as being part of a healthy system. Or how working two or more jobs means you’re “employed”, with no suggestion of the workload needed to maintain the household. And now, the current administration is more willing just to disappear numbers than to try to make them look correct.