I lived with a girl that seemed to make a lot of poor financial choices. I don't agree with the article, but I'm just sharing a story that seems on subject.

She had about $300 in her bank account, told me she was broke, and began selling off a few extras around the house. She ran her business from home and the holidays were coming up. I continued to work as usual, and ask what she's up to. Well, she was closing up shop for 2 weeks, because hey, it's the holidays, that means no work. I thought that was a little strange, you're struggling to pay bills, and not paying your one or two employees on time, but refuse to pickup the phone to make a few sales during the break. Anyway, we decide to make dinner for the holidays, so we go shopping. She wants an elaborate dinner, so we spend $300 on groceries and alcohol for the two of us. This seems outrageous, but I figure we'll have leftovers for a week, and I'm not broke, so I'll toss in my half. Anyway, great dinner. Next night, she doesn't want leftovers, she wants to go out for dinner. Ok, I'm down. Where does she suggest? A fairly upscale restaurant, and we burn another $150 on the two of us. The rest of the holiday she continues to complain about being broke, and I continued to scratch my head.

I also met another guy, who was completely broke, with all of his credit cards maxed out. However, he always insisted on paying for everyone. We go out for coffee with a dozen people, and he jumps up, and tosses it on his card. Out for lunch, he sneaks away to pay for the group. Broke, living with his parents, full of debt, pissing away money, and fighting to get finances for his project. Last time I talked with him, he was selling off childhood items, and business equipment to pay the bills.

With regards to your female friend: I think what she meant by broke is that she isn't really broke, she just doesn't have enough money for the lifestyle she's accustomed to or desires.

Well, your two anecdotes certainly sold me. Clearly, poverty in America is entirely the result of careless people making bad choices.

I think you misread, I mentioned in the first line I was simply sharing a story. None of the people involved were American, and I didn't claim this resulted in poverty or validated the article in any way.

> then you should realize averages exist because half of the people are below it.

Only true of median.

Gosh dang it. I knew one day I would make this mistake and be embarrassed by it... Oh well, I guess I'll just own it. I already know I am below average.. haha...

I think that the colloquial use of the term "average" actually means the median. That's how I have seen it used, anyway.

That's how it's often used. People might say something like, "half the people are below average". But if you ask the same person: What's the average of [4,5,9,10,10]? They'd answer 7.6 (after doing the math). This dual meaning creates confusion, and its why, at least those reporting on things, should clarify whether they mean the mean or the median. Similarly, as the old adage goes, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. People will take advantage of the misperception of "average" and report a mean as "the average", even though it hides the truth. For instance, around here people refer to the "average" income, some number like 50-60k, when the median income is actually around 40k. Or the average government employee salary, when again the median works out to be lower than the mean, which is what they report(here, won't claim mean is always greater than median as it can obviously be skewed either way).

I think a lot of people blindly assume a standard distribution (where medium and average are the same) because that's very often correct.

That doesn't absolve those responsible for reporting figures (or misreporting figures) of the responsibility of clarity. Mean and median are often quite distinct, especially in economic and financial figures, and reporting one as the other because it makes the point they're going for is disingenuous.

Another instance of statistics reporting abuse: doing <something> will increase your risk of <something> by <some percent>. It totally ignores that the original odds were so far against it ever happening that that increase may be double the risk or even 5 times, but it's still 1 in a million odds. Since the typical person has little more than a high school level of mathematics, and probably not a statistical course in that, they're easily thrown off by this sort of reporting.

No, people usually have the arithmetic mean in mind.

People have the arithmetic mean in mind, but their intuition of "average" is actually the median, or even more commonly the modus.

When somebody says "Average people are X", they usually mean "Most people I've encountered are X", which is the modus. Hell, I just did that in this exact sentence!

I like how we've totally ignored the guy's arguments due to some technicality in his post. That's Hacker News for you!

I think the colloquial meaning of average is "typical". Sometimes that's the mean and the median, and often, an hazy combination of the two.

In my experience very few people even know what "median" is, so they usually mean tha arithmetic average.

This is because not everyone is taught statistics.

Which is one kind of average...

I have a friend who defines pulling oneself by the bootstraps: ran away from home in impoverished Texas, lived in homeless sheleters and on the streets until she could be and borrow her way into a lower middle class existence.

She doesn't celebrate Xmas, or any of the social holidays, because they remind her of the home and family she can't interact with any more; every time she has tried visiting home, her relatives and friends try to soak her for all she's worth. They don't want to present to the world - they are just crave the momentary thrill of spending money on frivolous stuff, that they rarely see otherwise, and consequently value out of all proportion.

Er yeah, averages aren't made by half and half, they're made by dividing the sum by the count. It's quite possible to have 90% of the population be below average if the 10% is significantly above the average.

Depends on the average (good lord I can't believe I'm posting this on hacker news). You're talking about the mean, there's also the median which would fit the definition pretty well.

In math, most of the time, mean and average are used to mean the same thing. I will concede that yes, I did mean the mean average, or more properly, if you wish to be pedantic - the arithmetic mean average, instead of just "average".

I don't think I've ever seen a serious maths problem not be specific about the type of average they are referring to. In general speech, all three common types are meant (mode being the usual meaning of "the average/typical person...") and the context usually explains which someone means.

> I will concede that yes, I did mean the mean average

Which is fine, but you were complaining that someone else was wrong even though one obvious interpretation of their statement was correct.

I have never in my time in 8 years of math classes ever heard the term "average" referred to as the median or mode. When median or mode has been meant, it has always been explicitly stated as such. The more vague "average" being left to implicitly reference the arithmetic mean average of "sum total divided by count of values"

> I have never in my time in 8 years of math classes ever heard the term "average" referred to as the median or mode.

Good, I've never seen that too, as I said.

> When median or mode has been meant, it has always been explicitly stated as such.

As I said.

> The more vague "average" being left to implicitly reference the arithmetic mean average of "sum total divided by count of values"

This is not the case in common usage which is exactly the reason this comment thread started.

You know what I most like about Hacker News though? That instead of bitching about the content of the article, we're busy debating the semantics of mathematical definitions that infer the "average" person's impression of society than caring about the content of the article... that's pretty neat :P

What? That was you! You complained about someone using an ambiguous word to refer to one of its meanings.

> Er yeah, averages aren't made by half and half, they're made by dividing the sum by the count. It's quite possible to have 90% of the population be below average if the 10% is significantly above the average.

I then replied saying that the parent was correct if he meant a specific type of average, subtly implying that you were being ridiculous for complaining about it. Now you're complaining about the thing you did?

Er... that was just a statement of observation, I wasn't complaining trying to be a dick, merely passing comment :D