Did you mean to say...

Posted by Alan on June 13, 2004 at 01:59:05

In Reply to: The example posted by Miguel on June 12, 2004 at 15:28:55:

that the total number of members in the sample I gave you was known? If so, then I misunderstood what you originally wrote. It sounded to me like you were claiming that the median could be determined without knowing how many members were in the sample, (which would be impossible to do).

When you said the right side of the curve had no boundary, I thought you meant that the total number of members in the sample went to infinity.

Okay, that clears things up on determining the median, and yes, as long as the total number of sample members is known, and they are distributed along the curve left to right from lowest to highest income-earner, then it isn't necessary to know the income of the highest income-earner in order to determine the median, but it would be needed to determine the average.

Once again, I'll remind you that this is all a moot point, since all the incomes were known, since the data came from the IRS. Again, the statistics debunk your original assertion that those people making $25K or less pay most of the taxes. Anyone who examines the data with an objective and open mind will see that the right side of the curve (the upper middle class and higher class income-earners) are paying most of the total tax burden.