• @grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    251 day ago

    FYI (and I expect to be downvoted because y’all don’t want to hear this), but when an article talks about the “global 1%” it’s probably talking about YOU.

    Yes, you. And me. And probably most of the people reading this, who live in the US or another Western country and consider themselves “middle class.” WE are the global 1%.

    From https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/9/15/23874111/charity-philanthropy-americans-global-rich :

    If you earn $60,000 a year after tax and you don’t have kids, you’re in the richest 1 percent of the world’s population.

    Also, if you prefer to measure by wealth instead of income, that’s lower than you think, too. I’m having trouble finding a more recent figure, but as of 2018, the threshold to be considered global 1% in terms of net worth was only $871,320. No, didn’t typo: it really is only hundreds of thousands, not millions or billions.


    (The billionaires are more like the 0.01%.)

    • @skibidi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      425 minutes ago

      Yes, you. And me. And probably most of the people reading this, who live in the US or another Western country

      Not quite. 1% of global population is ~80 million people. There are about a billion people in the highly developed nations (US, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, South Korea, and some minor others). So the top 8% of the golden billion, if we assume all in the US, the top ~25% of the country.

    • @Xenny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      43 hours ago

      Oh thank God I’m still not the 1%. Average wage in the US is 45k and I’m not even making that

    • @ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      This is some wild reverse temporarily embarrassed millionaire bullshit right here.

      No matter how many times you repeat this responsability shifting nonsense, it won’t ever make the people earning 60k responsible for what billionaires are doing.

      Maybe visualising the scale of the numbers being discussed will help you see what a joke your comment is.

      (E: fixed link)

    • @Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      57 hours ago

      In addition to the problems with this that others have stated, this also ignores the wealth distribution among that 1%. Like how much does that 95% go down if we limit it to the top 0.1%? 0.01%?

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      That “study” is a charity trying to guilt people into giving money. When you adjust for PPP it becomes quite a different story. The media loves it because it drives clicks but it’s literally just a calculator to guilt you and a list of approved charities.

      This is what Oxfam has to say, from the actual article.

      The immense concentration of wealth, driven significantly by increased monopolistic corporate power, has allowed large corporations and the ultrarich who exercise control over them to use their vast resources to shape global rules in their favor, often at the expense of everyone else.

      • @Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        35 hours ago

        The immense concentration of wealth, driven significantly by increased monopolistic corporate power, has allowed large corporations and the ultrarich who exercise control over them to use their vast resources to shape global rules in their favor, often at the expense of everyone else.

        This is literally everything.

        Aside from the bullshit religion is responsible for, the vast majority of the issues with the whole world is down to this. Government of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation.

    • @callouscomic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      99 hours ago

      Only $800k net worth? Who the hell in middle class America has that? If they did, then homeownership would be less of an issue.

      • @grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        59 minutes ago

        Only $800k net worth? Who the hell in middle class America has that?

        Homeowners near retirement age, basically. Much of that net worth would be their home value, and the rest would be in their 401k/IRA.

        (Keep in mind that in order to achieve a “modest but comfortable” $40k/year middle-class retirement, you need $1M assets (not including your residence) to achieve a 4% safe withdrawal rate. Basically, you have to be a millionaire by retirement just to avoid poverty.)

    • @Einstein@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      1216 hours ago

      1% of 8 billion is only 80 million. I wouldn’t say most Americans are in the 1% when the 80 million is spread around the world.

      • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        78 hours ago

        I don’t know how this keeps getting trotted out and up voted. I swear it gets dunked on every time.

      • @Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -28 hours ago

        Not just Americans. First world nations in general. That’s about 20% of the population in there, so the top 5% of US, Europe, Japan, Australia, etc. We’re talking the upper middle class. $100K pre-tax gets you there easily, and thanks to rising prices of housing, I doubt most of them feel very rich at all.

        The billionaires are holding big numbers as well, and there’s a few of those dotted around the world, but I’d imagine they’re mostly concentrated in first world countries. If you can live anywhere, why would you live in a craphole?

    • @mako@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      2621 hours ago

      But what’s your point? Are people making $60k/year causing world hunger through artificial scarcity or is it the greed and mental illness of the capitalist class?

      • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        128 hours ago

        The math doesn’t even math though. It’s 80 million people, globally. Are we to believe no other country contributes to this number? The entire rest of the “Western world” doesn’t contribute at all?

        • @umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          25 hours ago

          i’m not sure, but the middle class in my third world country doesnt have even close to the buying power of the western middle class.

          • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            12 hours ago

            That’s not how purchasing power parity works. You compare the incomes with the same power, no matter what class they are in their regional economy.

            • @umbrella@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              12 hours ago

              thats sort of what i mean. if i were to compare it like that, only our 1% would be on par with the western middle class.

    • Maeve
      link
      fedilink
      723 hours ago

      I’d say it’s also relative to an area’s COL. Not technically, but practically. Sure I’m living great compared to many. The kleptocrats are the ones killing us all, including the habitat they need to survive. But hey, as long as they live longest with the most money, it’s all cake.