Every time I see one of these How the wealthy live" I see something seriously wrong and it's not what most people might think. I look at the numbers and think just how small the really wealthy community is. You have to go down to 50 million to get 98,000, on the entire planet. 50 million is a medium sized company, with probably 50 employees or so. That does not represent great wealth. :
http://www.businessinsider.com/where-th ... ve-2013-10
Not Enough Wealthy
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
You do realize you're talking about wealth distribution now (the noun, not the verb)?Jccarlton wrote:Every time I see one of these How the wealthy live" I see something seriously wrong and it's not what most people might think. I look at the numbers and think just how small the really wealthy community is. You have to go down to 50 million to get 98,000, on the entire planet. 50 million is a medium sized company, with probably 50 employees or so. That does not represent great wealth. :
http://www.businessinsider.com/where-th ... ve-2013-10
That's one in about 74,000 worldwide, or one in 7000 in the US.
What do you consider "great wealth"? Do you think more people should be that wealthy?
-
Schneibster
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:21 am
- Location: Monterey, CA, USA
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
If you're right it's because there are too many ultra wealthy.
Personally I don't see the point of all this. There's plenty for everyone if a few ultra greedy didn't insist on proving they're better than everyone else by hogging it all. The worst thing is they could give up most of it and their lifestyle wouldn't change one iota.
I will also point out that there were a lot more wealthy before 2000.
Just sayin'.
Personally I don't see the point of all this. There's plenty for everyone if a few ultra greedy didn't insist on proving they're better than everyone else by hogging it all. The worst thing is they could give up most of it and their lifestyle wouldn't change one iota.
I will also point out that there were a lot more wealthy before 2000.
Just sayin'.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
-
palladin9479
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
Wealth is a relative term. Whether your wealthy or not is relative to the people around you. Someone making 60,000 USD a year isn't wealthy by any means in the USA, that same person transposed into the Philippines is suddenly wealthy. Wealth is really about the ratio of total income to potentially disposable income.
-
Schneibster
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:21 am
- Location: Monterey, CA, USA
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
This sounds like a copout to me.palladin9479 wrote:Wealth is a relative term. Whether your wealthy or not is relative to the people around you. Someone making 60,000 USD a year isn't wealthy by any means in the USA, that same person transposed into the Philippines is suddenly wealthy. Wealth is really about the ratio of total income to potentially disposable income.
They stole it from us, is what happened.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
If you don't buy anything they can't get a penny. The poorer YOU are the more you stick it to them. YOU should be living on the street. That'll show them.Schneibster wrote:This sounds like a copout to me.palladin9479 wrote:Wealth is a relative term. Whether your wealthy or not is relative to the people around you. Someone making 60,000 USD a year isn't wealthy by any means in the USA, that same person transposed into the Philippines is suddenly wealthy. Wealth is really about the ratio of total income to potentially disposable income.
They stole it from us, is what happened.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
-
Schneibster
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:21 am
- Location: Monterey, CA, USA
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
I got a better idea: vote to take it from them with the police and the army. Since the police and army aren't rich either I bet they go along with it.MSimon wrote:If you don't buy anything they can't get a penny. The poorer YOU are the more you stick it to them. YOU should be living on the street. That'll show them.Schneibster wrote:This sounds like a copout to me.palladin9479 wrote:Wealth is a relative term. Whether your wealthy or not is relative to the people around you. Someone making 60,000 USD a year isn't wealthy by any means in the USA, that same person transposed into the Philippines is suddenly wealthy. Wealth is really about the ratio of total income to potentially disposable income.
They stole it from us, is what happened.
I'd make the ultra rich nice medals for their patriotic assistance with trickle down economics. They could even rehabilitate Raygun Ronnie again after Iran/Contra. Even Ronnie was in favor of redistribution of wealth; he just imagined everyone spent it as freely as he did. He may have been the Great Obfuscator but nobody ever accused him of being tightfisted.
See the thing is most of the rich would remain rich; and all of the ultra rich would still be rich. There just wouldn't be any ultra rich any more.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Re: Not Enough Wealthy
What is "potentially disposable income"?palladin9479 wrote:Wealth is a relative term. Whether your wealthy or not is relative to the people around you. Someone making 60,000 USD a year isn't wealthy by any means in the USA, that same person transposed into the Philippines is suddenly wealthy. Wealth is really about the ratio of total income to potentially disposable income.
It's a matter of expectations. For the local population that person would be wealthy. But that person would now have limited access to the goods and services they're used to, so they may consider themselves less wealthy than before despite being able to buy more basic goods.