The average is, as you say, misleading when the distribution of values is as asymmetric as income and wealth currently are. Unfortunately, it's the easiest figure to calculate, so it's the quickest to update (e.g., "the average investor made $100 today, because the market went up by a billion dollars, and there are ten million investment accounts.")

The median (to be a little more precise) is the point at which half of the population falls above, and half below, so in principle it requires sorting every data point, then finding the middle of the list. That's Just Too Hard for many analysts, even though it's a much more useful measure.

As for the mode, the most commonly occurring value, it can depend a lot on how the data is aggregated into categories. The more finely the categories are defined, the more likely it is that some values will form the highest cluster. If there were a nationally-applied minimum wage, it might be that 5% of the population earn EXACTLY that amount, so there would be a spike at the bottom of the earnings scale, even though the median might be 4-5 times higher (but those near the median all make slightly different amounts, so they don't create a spike at any one amount). Just in small numbers, suppose we have 100 people, and 5 make $10/hour, 4 make $11, 4 make $12, 4 make $13, and so on until we find that the last 3 make $34. The mode would be $10, but what does that actually tell us? The median is $22, and the average $28 (if I've done the math right). The ratio between the average (mean) and median tells us that the distribution is skewed toward the high end. (And the real world is a lot more skewed than my example.)

I have no doubt that income inequality is a serious problem, but it looks to me that it's the result of millions of consumers making billions of choices, to buy the cheapest product that satisfies their desires without regard to the impact that these choices have on their neighbors. Nobody forced customers to shop by mail with Sears, and put the local peddlers out of business. Nobody forced customers to buy books through Amazon, and reveal their desires to invite targeted advertising to encourage those desires to be satisfied through Amazon. As for me, I try to minimize my desires, and minimize the distance the things I buy must travel to me, even when that means that I have to wait a couple of weeks for a new pair of casual shoes to be sent from Wisconsin, or pay 2x the price for a nice pair of work boots (made in Wisconsin). We need to look past the price and convenience and understand the social impact of every purchase. (Political choices are blunt and infrequent. Purchasing choices are precise and continual. Express your values at the market, as well as at the ballot box.)

It seems that every civilization tends in the direction of economic/social power disparity and as I have often warned my comfortable friends, DESPERATE MEN DO DESPERATE THINGS. Franklin Roosevelt recognized this truth and averted (temporarily) a second American revolution by spreading the wealth around a bit more, much to the consternation of the entrenched comfortable class and the utter horror of the robber barons. We are still engaged in that continuing struggle. As Warren Buffett says - “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

I was struck by David's point that just as Green Wizards need to find ways to deal with the physical environment we find ourselves in, we also need to find ways to deal with the social environment; both for ourselves and those who may be looking to us for guidance.

Clearly we cannot compete with Buffett's class on their terms unless we organize and work together via cooperatives and other member owned ventures, via trade unions, etc. I have been a union member and currently belong to a food coop, an electrical cooperative and (hopefully this Spring) a local credit union. So I do support collective action and believe that coops are part of a good response to the economic situation we are in. But you can't push rope and cooperative ventures may or may not be an option where you live, and you can't be in a cooperative without some cooperation from your neighbors. So what can we do or advise at the personal and family level?

My answer is CASH businesses; stay small, admit nothing, acquire no permits or certificates, leave no paper trail. A friend who was once a troubadour on the Ren Fair circuit, a chimney sweep, a kayak guide and a freelance radio journalist, describes his career as "Finding cracks in the pavement in which to grow, like a dandelion." Whether your income is average, median or 'mode' (never heard that term before BTW) doesn't matter nearly so much as how much of it you wind up keeping. And good budgeting DOES help you keep more of what you earn because it helps you become aware of the importance of reducing expenses.

For example: By brewing your own cider (or beer, wine, kombucha, rootbeer, etc.) instead of buying it, you reduce your cash needs and your dependence on unreliable supply chains at the same time. And if you get good at it, you can trade your cider for goods or services that you really can't or prefer not to make or do for yourself.

I guess what I'm getting at in a nutshell is: You CAN get by on very little cash income, IF your expenses that must be paid in cash are also very small. Remove yourself from the 'cash economy' as much as possible. Study the way the majority of Mexicans get by in their economy. I think you will find that it's quite possible to live a good life with not much "official income" by redefining what a 'good life' means to you. And especially by rejecting the materialistic crap-fest that is presented in most media as desirable. So, how does that work when you're stuck in a dead-end job and an expensive apartment and your car needs new tires?

It means you must first make a brutally honest inventory of your assets and liabilities; this includes skills and personal habits/traits as well as money and 'stuff'. And then you need to be willing to make real changes in your life. This is scary and it often helps to have someone else to talk to who is going through or has already gone through, similar changes. Thus this forum.

So, for the reader with the bald tires and crappy job - perhaps you should consider a different job and a different place to live; ones that are close enough together that you don't need a car. It doesn't need to be forever, but clearly you are in an untenable position and something(s) need to change...

In fact, for everyone now living in an urban or suburban setting, unless you own your residence outright, I suggest you seriously consider moving to someplace that requires less cash to get by. There are small towns all across the middle of the USA that have declining populations (especially of young people) and are welcoming to newcomers that don't bring 'city' attitudes with them, especially if you throw yourself into whatever job you can find, do it well, and join as many groups as you can. Church groups, choirs, fraternal organizations, volunteer organizations, etc. anything to get to know people. Because knowing people and more importantly, them knowing you, is how everything works in small towns. The good rental never makes it to the bulletin board...

The definition of adventure is when the outcome is uncertain. Life is an adventure. Might as well embrace the change, since it's coming whether you will or no.

It's difficult to budget yourself out of poverty when every penny is earmarked twice over.
That said, those "stop buying kale smoothies and coffee milkshakes" lectures aren't completely wrong.

However, those lectures are NOT aimed at genuinely poor people! They're aimed at middle-class readers of magazines who want to believe they can make tiny, inconsequential changes and reap huge benefits.

You won't save much $$ by quitting your daily coffee milkshake habit but you will save pennies.

The difficulty -- and only true thrift writers like Amy Dacyzcyn address it -- is you have to be willing to make bigger, harder, permanent lifestyle changes. Magazine editors have to kowtow to their advertisers who do NOT want consumers to consider that they could actually get by on, you know, LESS. That's why you see these silly articles.

A few years back (during the Great Recession?) I recall stories about "My week without spending" or "My month without spending" or even a book "My Year without spending". Without exception, those writers who actually put those efforts into practice discovered how casually they spent and how much cash they had left over when they didn't spend without thinking.

But again, our economy is based on thoughtless spending by middleclass and above earners so actual thrifty living stories are discouraged or made out as "too hard".

If you make near the median income, it's possible to spend less but it requires that you be constantly vigilant and constantly say no. But it can be done. If your income is higher (recall that the median means half of all households own more) it's possible to live on much less.

Since I personally know a low-six-figure income household who were always on the verge of bankruptcy court, I know that uncontrolled spending can be a genuine issue. They had money. They just spent it very poorly.

My feelings on spending and thrift are more complex. It's the rare household that can't spend a bit less but so often, that bit extra is what gives enjoyment when nothing else does.

In the end though, you have to choose.
Is money your servant or your master?

has gotten a lot smaller in Canada over the course of the pandemic. A lot of people have made the move, and rents in the smaller centers in BC have shot up. At the low end of the market, looking for a studio, 1 bedroom, or shared apartment, you might not save as much as you expect, so look before you leap. This is especially true if you would go from being able to get by without a car to needing one. I reckon the costs of owning a car are larger than the price arbitrage on a bedroom with a shared apartment in small towns vs. larger cities in this province.

it really depends on your circumstances. I am lucky enough to have found a really good deal on housing, with enough space to actually grow some food, and store some, and prepare it properly. I find I can get by without a car, I buy a lot of stuff second hand, and I have gotten fairly good at mending clothing. All of this has saved me a lot of money, and I'm in a better place financially than I really ought to be given my income. Savings, not debt.

I also don't have smoke, drink, illegal drug habits. Those are really expensive. I know addictions are difficult, for some impossible to quit, but they are a hideous money suck on top of the health impacts. If you need extra motivation to quit, try adding up all the money you'd save over the course of a month or a year. If you can manage to quit, it can make a big difference that may be the difference between getting by and not. It will also leave you with more choice in housing options, since landlords and roommates tend not to want tenants with these habits. Put the money saved and being more appealing to landlords together, and quitting can be the difference between being housed and not, especially in tight markets.

When I was a college student, after my second year in university housing, I got a summer-rental at a very low price. The landlord had empty rooms, so getting something for the room (in a group house) was better than getting nothing. After I moved in, I looked around, and thought that the windows around the common entry were too dirty for my taste, so I washed them. And the shrubs around the entrance were overgrown, so I trimmed them. The kitchen..., oh my, the shared kitchen, in the basement, had muddy footprints across the floor that might have been there for weeks, and those little windows near the ceiling were so dirty,... so I cleaned it, top to bottom. After a month or so, the landlord came by for an inspection. I was invited to stay through the school year, not at the summer rate, but for NOTHING, as long as I kept up with property maintenance and otherwise represented the landlord's interests to the other tenants. Two years - rent free - cooking most of my own meals - working part-time - and I managed to graduate simply flat broke, not drowning in debt.

I think it was important that I didn't negotiate with him. I just did what I did, because that was the way I wanted to live, and he knew that I wouldn't cheat him, because I didn't do it FOR him.