6 ms·

If you take the global richest 1%, pretty much everyone on this website gets included. The cut-off point is at around $35,000 a year.

by hatu 12y ago

whybroke 12y ago
Rather than seeking contrived numbers to reinforce your preconceive notions, you could actually spend a few seconds on google to figure it out. The article talks about ownership so: Net world wealth $263,242bil [1] World population 7bil [2] Thus you need roughly $2million in assets to be in the world 1% [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_wealth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_wealth [2]https://www.google.com/search?q=world+population&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=world+population&ie=utf-8&oe...
- Thrymr 12y ago
  How did you get $2 million from that? What distribution did you assume? According to [0], net worth of $1 million would put you in the top 0.7%. [0] http://www.international-adviser.com/ia/media/Media/Credit-Suisse-Global-Wealth-Databook-2013.pdf http://www.international-adviser.com/ia/media/Media/Credit-S...
  - whybroke 12y ago
    I'm answering the contrived $35k income claim above. That claimant is likely not going to pay much attention to a 150 page document from any source let alone one that goes contrary to his opinion. Thus one needs a proof short enough to get through that barrier of near instant disbelief. A very rough sanity check shows: $263,242bil / 2 / ( 7*10^9 / 100 ) = $1,880,300 ie approx 2million Obviously this is a highly simplified approximation, of necessity for that audience. Equally obvious, it is vastly greater than $34k.
    - hatu 12y ago
      You're making the assumption that the bottom of the 1% and the top of the 1% have the same amount of wealth which is completely wrong. Nice superiority complex though. The $35k number is for the #70,000,000th wealthiest person. According to your claim there would be 70 million millionaires in the world. Sanity check there?
knocte 12y ago
>The cut-off point is at around $35,000 a year. That doesn't sound true. Can you back up your argument with facts' data?
- aaronbrethorst 12y ago
  Google search for top 1% of income in the world: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-need-34k-income-global-elite--half-worlds-richest-live-U-S.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-ne...
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- sz4kerto 12y ago
  My guess is that he's mixing income with wealth (just a guess though).
- maxk42 12y ago
  http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/business-tech/120331/global-pay-scale-international-labor-organization http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/business-tech/120331... Various sources from the past couple years cite between $34,000 and $37,000. More than two-thirds of the population of the earth makes less than $1,000 a year, so this shouldn't be very surprising.
  - Arnor 12y ago
    I'm confused... Sniff test: World pop: ~ 7,000,000,000 1%: ~ 70,000,000 Population of the US ~ 300,000,000 Median income in the US ~ $50,000 So you can come up with well over 70 million people in the US with incomes greater than $50,000. How then can the global top 1% cut off be $35k?
    - maxerickson 12y ago
      Median personal income in the US is ~$35,000, I think you must have looked at household. That $35,000 doesn't include people under 25. So the "7 billion" median would be even lower.
elchief 12y ago
Stock != flow
youngtaff 12y ago
But it depends how we define wealth - if you define it by income it's going to cast a wider net than if you define it by assets. My view is we should define the 1% by assests

If you take the global richest 1%, pretty much everyone on this website gets included. The cut-off point is at around $35,000 a year.

by hatu 12y ago

If you take the global richest 1%, pretty much everyone on this website gets included. The cut-off point is at around $35,000 a year.

whybroke 12y ago

Rather than seeking contrived numbers to reinforce your preconceive notions, you could actually spend a few seconds on google to figure it out. The article talks about ownership so: Net world wealth $263,242bil [1] World population 7bil [2] Thus you need roughly $2million in assets to be in the world 1% [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_wealth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_wealth [2]https://www.google.com/search?q=world+population&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=world+population&ie=utf-8&oe...

Thrymr 12y ago
How did you get $2 million from that? What distribution did you assume? According to [0], net worth of $1 million would put you in the top 0.7%. [0] http://www.international-adviser.com/ia/media/Media/Credit-Suisse-Global-Wealth-Databook-2013.pdf http://www.international-adviser.com/ia/media/Media/Credit-S...
- whybroke 12y ago
  I'm answering the contrived $35k income claim above. That claimant is likely not going to pay much attention to a 150 page document from any source let alone one that goes contrary to his opinion. Thus one needs a proof short enough to get through that barrier of near instant disbelief. A very rough sanity check shows: $263,242bil / 2 / ( 7*10^9 / 100 ) = $1,880,300 ie approx 2million Obviously this is a highly simplified approximation, of necessity for that audience. Equally obvious, it is vastly greater than $34k.
  - hatu 12y ago
    You're making the assumption that the bottom of the 1% and the top of the 1% have the same amount of wealth which is completely wrong. Nice superiority complex though. The $35k number is for the #70,000,000th wealthiest person. According to your claim there would be 70 million millionaires in the world. Sanity check there?

knocte 12y ago

>The cut-off point is at around $35,000 a year. That doesn't sound true. Can you back up your argument with facts' data?

aaronbrethorst 12y ago
Google search for top 1% of income in the world: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-need-34k-income-global-elite--half-worlds-richest-live-U-S.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-ne...
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
sz4kerto 12y ago
My guess is that he's mixing income with wealth (just a guess though).
maxk42 12y ago
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/business-tech/120331/global-pay-scale-international-labor-organization http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/business-tech/120331... Various sources from the past couple years cite between $34,000 and $37,000. More than two-thirds of the population of the earth makes less than $1,000 a year, so this shouldn't be very surprising.
- Arnor 12y ago
  I'm confused... Sniff test: World pop: ~ 7,000,000,000 1%: ~ 70,000,000 Population of the US ~ 300,000,000 Median income in the US ~ $50,000 So you can come up with well over 70 million people in the US with incomes greater than $50,000. How then can the global top 1% cut off be $35k?
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    Median personal income in the US is ~$35,000, I think you must have looked at household. That $35,000 doesn't include people under 25. So the "7 billion" median would be even lower.

elchief 12y ago

Stock != flow

youngtaff 12y ago

But it depends how we define wealth - if you define it by income it's going to cast a wider net than if you define it by assets. My view is we should define the 1% by assests