[Retric]

> even if relative wealth disparities remain constant.

Relative wealth disparity increases as absolute wealth increases because below a minimum level of income people starve. IE you can’t make 1/10th the median wage in a subsistence economy long term you just die. But a homeless person can survive for decades in the US on ~500$ a month.

[thaumasiotes]

> IE you can’t make 1/10th the median wage in a subsistence economy long term you just die. But a homeless person can survive for decades in the US on ~500$ a month.

There are two things I'd like to know more about for this:

1. Is the homeless person doing their survival in an area with a markedly lower median wage than the median wage their income is being measured against? (i.e. is "1/10 the median wage" an illusion created by including foreign communities in the 'median wage'?)

2. Is the homeless person's low income measured by excluding their income from in-kind handouts ("someone kind bought me a sandwich") and foraging ("I found a pizza in the dumpster")?

[Retric]

2) This was more a hypothetical argument than an analysis of a specific individual. Humans survived before electricity let alone AC. They can’t survive without food. What’s the minimum someone can meet the basic needs for survival paying market rates?

But the argument still stands if you want to raise the minimum in the US to 1,000$/month to account for hidden value and require shelter. 8 people sharing a 2BR apartment is very much a thing.

[JumpCrisscross]

Does this effect have a name? I wonder how you'd adust for it in a modified GINI metric.