• Professorozone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Or to quantify it further. If someone has $20m, but no job. Is this person in the top 1%? I think so, but it is conceivable that this person lives very frugally in order to pass that on to his children or something.

    Also, I think people like to say the top 1%, when they really mean the top 0.1%. I believe the top 1% income or savings, however it is defined, is a lot lower than most think. I believe when most people refer to this colloquially, they really mean billionaires.

    • ifItWasUpToMe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you have $20m you are EASILY making 500k/year in interest/dividends/investment growth. You’d have to try pretty hard to not grow your $20m.

      • Professorozone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The point was, how is top 1% determined? Some people have high income and spend it all, others are good savers but don’t have a high income. Or is it based on net worth? I realize this may sound ridiculous, but as I mentioned, I believe 1% is a lower bar than people think it is.

        • ifItWasUpToMe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          To me net worth makes the most sense. I do agree 1% isn’t as high as people think. When people talk about the 1% they are probably thinking more about the top 0.1% or even 0.01%.

          Looking just at the states with ~330 million people that would be 3.3 million 1%ers. Tons of people who never made huge salaries, but are great at saving and investing will be in that category.