Re: apologia

[Stephen E Philion <philion@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Max wrote:
I think it's more general.  It's the floating, meaningless reference point.
You thought X was bad because it had a level of some number Y.
But you should really redefine X as something else, and the latter
has a level less than Y, so X is really not as bad as you thought,
hence not so bad in general.

--If I'm not mistaken, he's also counting 'property' of the lowest quintile, but ignoring the property (dividends, mulitiple homes, jets, cars, diamond necklaces, etc...) of the uppermost quintile, no?

Steve

Stephen Philion
Assistant Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
St. Cloud State University
St. Cloud, MN

http://stephenphilion.efoliomn2.com/