pull down to refresh

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @Hamstr 24 Apr
1,222 adults is not nearly enough data especially in Chicago. I did a little data analytics, you need way more then that. That looks a bit skewed.
reply
Agree. Moreover, surveys are not to be trusted for such small numbers. Plus, how can be statistically significant a sample drawn from a single subset of population observations (Chicago) and being considered representative of the US population? That is odd at best
reply
That's a lot of pay cheque to paycheque people, like 50%+ even in the best cohort, and in the biggest economy in the world, the rest of the world is even even worse shape and even if you do manage to save, if you can't access US financial markets you've been getting your clock cleaned.
When I see stuff like this it just makes me feel like satoshis are so undervalued
reply
ouch. Shows how well america saves money. But it has always been this way. Many people live paycheck to paycheck.
reply
if we showed the data from other countries they would be much worse, the US always tends to do things a little better than other countries, in Europe, this is surely worse.
reply
Bitcoiners mostly do have savings.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nym 24 Apr
Too small of a sample size, it will have a large error rate.
reply
This is really a very small sample size. You need at least 10k to really make it count.
reply
why 10k ?
The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97% of the U.S. household population
reply