• fiat_lux@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the US median income is $46,625/year. So more then half of Americans are not part of the richest 10%

      While true, $46,625 is still the top 32%. Which suggests that the average American will still have to make some lifestyle cuts. Even though they’re already exploited hard by their ruling class.

      $30k, the entry level salary for US restaurant workers, is the 50% mark. So basically, every full-time working US adult is in the top 50% richest globally by income. Their exorbitant medical and student debts make that not feel anything like how being rich is portrayed, even if they are technically richer when measured by income alone.

      You know things are fucked when most of the richest people in the world are struggling to put a roof over their head and pay for essentials.

      • rexxit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s worth noting that Americans also must spend that income in a similarly-inflated market, so it doesn’t much matter what their salary would be worth in, say, Uganda. I think any such comparison of global wealth runs into these sorts of issues.

        Someone earning in the global top 10% may not be able to afford a house locally. Someone earning in the top 30% may not be able to afford rent and food at the same time in their locale. It makes the percentile meaningless.

        • fiat_lux@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yep, this is after all adjustments using the United Nations SNA 2008. It’s not perfect, but it’s the closest we have for accounting for those differences.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There were two possible definitions to go by: income or net worth. Look how low the net worth figure is (especially the one from the Credit Suisse study).

      Keep in mind that even a $1M net worth – more than either the Credit Suisse or World Inequality Report measure – is considered on the low side in terms of retirement savings by age 65. (At a 4% safe withdrawal rate, it only gets you $40k/year to live on.)

      • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Page 25 has a breakdown of median wealth. For the US it is $93,271, however for Western Europe it is higher then that to be fair.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      A $122,100/year

      The person you’re reacting to mentions net worth. Owning a total of 138k is like a quarter of a house here

      • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        A lot of people have debt on their home, if they own it. There are also a lot of Americans among the people with the lowest net worth in the world. That is mainly student debt and they do not live bad lifes, but the thing is that median net worth of adults in the US is still $93,271 according to the same study. So litterally half of Americans are not part of the global 10% in terms of net worth either.

        • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          litterally half of Americans are not part of the global 10% in terms of net worth either.

          You do realize that saying “Somewhat over half aren’t”, means that a very large number of people ARE, right?