Americans make up half of the world's richest 1%

[IceBergSLiM]

Right, which is why Obama has been trying to appoint a Director for the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for the last year. Republicans have been blocking it not because they don't like the man selected, but because they don't want the department to start policing their constituency. But nevermind all that, it is Obama's fault. 🙄

it is politics you have to throw a bone to the otherside now and again.

edit: watch the obama deception

 

[Throckmorton]

It depends on the median standard of living found in Hawaii and what it takes to have a decent life vs other parts of the world or even the US as a matter of fact. While you may earn less in some places your standard of living may be higher because the cost of living itself (purchases, taxes, etc) may give you more bang for your buck.

My standard of living is OK, though very basic. But I rely on $5000 of debt per year. My salary is $36516 of which I take home $22000.

So where does that put me on the scale? Certainly not in the top 1% of anything.

 

[Dulanic]

So Conseravative's message to Americans is if you make $34K per year for a family of four, be happy.

That can't be true! We can all be billionaires if we put our mind to it... isn't that the republican thought process?

Basically republicans say if you make $34K be happy and then in the next argument say don't be happy, you can all be billionaires if you just try.

 

[Dulanic]

My standard of living is OK, though very basic. But I rely on $5000 of debt per year. My salary is $36516 of which I take home $22000.

So where does that put me on the scale? Certainly not in the top 1% of anything.

The top 1% of the world... because your pay should be judged based on the whole world not the US.

 

[Throckmorton]

The top 1% of the world... because your pay should be judged based on the whole world not the US.

Except
a) I'm not in the top 1% after taxes, much less the other costs like health insurance.
b) I don't even make enough for a basic existence with the cost of living.


Read this comment on the article:
Mark Johnson, 16 minutes ago
Some of you guys can't read. The story clearly states that cost of living is factored in. It also clearly states that the $34,000 is AFTER TAXES. So taking sales taxes, real estate taxes, and income taxes into account, you probably need to make something on the order of $65,000 PER PERSON.That means a couple with two kids would need to make upwards of 200K.

 

[Cerb]

So, the top 10% of the US is the top 1% of the world. So, great, I'm still in the 99%, even if all 7 billion are counted.

The true global middle class, falls far short of owning a home, having a car in a driveway, saving for retirement and sending their kids to college. In fact, people at the world's true middle -- as defined by median income -- live on just $1,225 a year. (And, yes, Milanovic's numbers are adjusted to account for different costs of living across the globe.)

I would also like to point out that this is impossible to compare to; and also that the majority of the U.S., that houses these world's richest, can't afford to own a home, save for retirement, or send their kids to college (a car is a necessity in most of the country, so whether it's in a driveway or parking garage is not all that important).

A subsistence farmer in South America, FI, selling excess, could be in better shape than a typical person in the U.S. making 20k+/yr (assuming no welfare). A person in one nation may not have reasonable options to lower their costs of living to the same levels as somewhere else. As long as that is the case, any normalized dollar to dollar comparison is propaganda.

While still highly flawed, a decent comparison, at least, would be comparing consumed commodities, counting using your own production the same as pure consumption (if I buy food, that's part of COL; but if you make your food, only external inputs are COL; that's skewed from the start, and only gets worse as technology is factored in). Then, count in paying off any debts as a negative against current wages. Then taking what's left over after that type of COL comparison, and compare it to local commodity and service costs (my $20 won't get me as much as a Panamanian's $20). Then, the ratio of the two would be the comparative advantage. Developed nations would still be on top, and there would still be holes, but it would remove the degree of absurdity that these types of studies exhibit, and at least be a step towards being able to measure meaningful wealth by income and outgo.

I have suspicious feeling, though, that any such work would have a hard time finding proper funding.

 

[Throckmorton]

Conservatives point to this and say, "See, you're rich!!"

I point to this and say, "See how badly wealth is concentrated when even someone in the top 1% of the world (top 10% of America earning over $65k) isn't doing that great compared to the uber rich?"


You can't say "you're rich because you're in the top 1% of the world" because that's not what makes you rich or even doing OK. Just like being middle class doesn't mean you have a decent standard of living, because in America you DON'T. That's what Occupy is about. The whole point is that we're poor even though we work hard and get educations and have jobs.

You might as well tell a Chinese child laborer "You earn more than a bowl of rice a day, you're in the top half of the world you lucky bastard!!"

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Except
a) I'm not in the top 1% after taxes, much less the other costs like health insurance.
b) I don't even make enough for a basic existence with the cost of living.

Did anyone force you to move to Hawaii and take a low paying government job?

 

[Throckmorton]

Did anyone force you to move to Hawaii and take a low paying government job?

Did anyone force you to be a dumbass?

This is reality for a huge portion of America... a job that doesn't pay a living wage. Don't you fucking understand that whether I take the job or not, someone has to do it? The point is that I live in America, I make more money than the vast majority of the world, I'm a member of a union, and my net worth is negative and decreasing. This is the norm in this country. Do you fucking understand yet? Articles like this are bullshit.

 

[Throckmorton]

Look how rich we are!! Only half of us are poor or low income!! GOD BLESS AMERICA http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec11/othernews_12-15.html

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Did anyone force you to be a dumbass?

This is reality for a huge portion of America... a job that doesn't pay a living wage. Don't you fucking understand that whether I take the job or not, someone has to do it? The point is that I live in America, I make more money than the vast majority of the world, I'm a member of a union, and my net worth is negative and decreasing. This is the norm in this country. Do you fucking understand yet? Articles like this are bullshit.

Don't be mad at me for your decisions. My net worth is growing every year and has been doing so for decades.

 

[Throckmorton]

Don't be mad at me for your decisions. My net worth is growing every year and has been doing so for decades.

Good for you. Most Americans' aren't. Everybody can't physically choose to be successful, much less rich.

You live in a town with a median household income under $35k. That means most of your neighbors and the people you rely on in your day to day life are doing pretty badly, even by rural Texas standards.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Good for you. Most Americans' aren't. Everybody can't physically choose to be successful, much less rich.

You live in a town with a median household income under $35k. That means most of your neighbors and the people you rely on in your day to day life are doing pretty badly, even by rural Texas standards.

You crack me up, I had to work for everything I've got. I served 12 years in the military making far less percentage wise than you do now. I've worked for 21 years at the company I work for presently. For 18 years of my time with the company I spent as much as 11 months a year on the road. Also during those 18 years I also worked 40% of that time overseas. I went to where the work was rather than accepting some piss poor job with piss poor wages.

 

[Throckmorton]

You crack me up, I had to work for everything I've got. I served 12 years in the military making far less percentage wise than you do now. I've worked for 21 years at the company I work for presently. For 18 years of my time with the company I spent as much as 11 months a year on the road. Also during those 18 years I also worked 40% of that time overseas. I went to where the work was rather than accepting some piss poor job with piss poor wages.

So that somehow makes it OK that the single mom down the street is working 2 jobs 60 hours a week, can't afford health insurance, will never own a house, and can't save any money for a rainy day? She's rich because she makes more money than a farmer in the Amazon jungle right?

 

[dmcowen674]

Americans make up half of the world's richest 1%
http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/04/news/economy/world_richest/index.htm
Someone needs to share this article with the Occupy movement.

Speak for yourself 1%er

 

[bfdd]

If you live in America you cannot bitch. I am sorry, the world is just not that bad here. Oh noes you might have to get your hands dirty or go without some luxury items for awhile, yes eating 2000 calories every day is a fucking luxury and don't forget it.

 

[Throckmorton]

If you live in America you cannot bitch. I am sorry, the world is just not that bad here. Oh noes you might have to get your hands dirty or go without some luxury items for awhile, yes eating 2000 calories every day is a fucking luxury and don't forget it.

To you, eating 2000 calories a day is a luxury??

So what do you consider a basic existence? Starvation?

 

[Throckmorton]

I hope the American people are paying attention. To conservatives, simply surviving is now a luxury. For other people, not themselves of course.

 

[monovillage]

Except
a) I'm not in the top 1% after taxes, much less the other costs like health insurance.
b) I don't even make enough for a basic existence with the cost of living.


Read this comment on the article:
Mark Johnson, 16 minutes ago
Some of you guys can't read. The story clearly states that cost of living is factored in. It also clearly states that the $34,000 is AFTER TAXES. So taking sales taxes, real estate taxes, and income taxes into account, you probably need to make something on the order of $65,000 PER PERSON.That means a couple with two kids would need to make upwards of 200K.

Wow, you can clearly see how the scum that continually cry to raise taxes really screw people in the middle class.

 

[rchiu]

I hope the American people are paying attention. To conservatives, simply surviving is now a luxury. For other people, not themselves of course.

Who said anything about simply surviving is now a luxury? America still has the best opportunities in the world. Best universities, most top companies to work for. If you work hard and make the right choices, you can be a millionaire easy. But if you don't know what you need to do to succeed, at least you won't starve.

In other part of the world, the same people who don't know what you need to do to succeed lives in garbage filled slums and eats trash for living.

Yes America has it made and you don't even know it.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Well I wouldn't say the rich paying marginally more in taxes (say 3%, hell even 5%) would change their standard of living at all, or their spending habits for that matter. The American middle class receiving those funds in the form of redistribution would undoubtedly see their standards of living rise as well as their spending habits increase. On the other hand, striving to be as poor as the rest of the world (going from $47K annually to $1.2K annually) is a big, big drop in standards of living.

Assuming this is reasonably accurate, by my calculations with the average 1%'er making $717000 a year and there being 1,350,000 families of 1%'ers, taxing them at 5% and dividing that amongst the 132,000,000 in the bottom 90% only yields $367 per family. Of course, one can assume that the 89th percentile guys can get stuffed, but even if you redistribute it among only the bottom ~40% (link), you're looking at ~$1080 per family. What will that accomplish?

 

[Broheim]

my dad is a 1%er, should he feel bad for working his ass off >70 hours a week?

 

[pcgeek11]

So Conseravative's message to Americans is if you make $34K per year for a family of four, be happy.

Maybe if you are making 34K a years you shouldn't be making babies you cannot afford to feed. Hmmmm.

 

[Joepublic2]

my dad is a 1%er, should he feel bad for working his ass off >70 hours a week?

No, as long as he makes his money from the sweat of his brow and not by fleecing the public. Also, tell him I said hi and that I'll see him at the next 1%er meeting.

To you, eating 2000 calories a day is a luxury??

So what do you consider a basic existence? Starvation?

Well, to be fair most people can live indefinitely on 1500 calories a day if they have a correspondingly low activity level. Not much fun, though.

Although the last time I checked the US produces enough food to provide every man, woman and child in the country with about 3000kcal/day of food through socialist farm aide programs that subsidize the production of food. So I don't think there's any valid reason for anybody to go hungry, at least in the United States.