Yeah, but you didn't define yours either. I needed a name to show the group on the pie.
The key differences between yours and my calcs are that you didn't look at population size as the dependent variable as closely as I did.
What do you call your "other" group?
Anyway, it is 41.5% of population to you, but 36.82% for me, that's a 14,449,291 people difference even if it's just barely under 5%.
The truth to the 42% statement is that we can see it's the millionaires + billionaires totaled, which represents a whopping 3.17% of the USA
The rest of the 96.82% of the USA is shadowed from the ~3.17% billionaires+millionaires. (Remember, that 96.82 is 36.82 + 60.00)
I couldn't use your numbers because you didn't factor the numbers for the rest of the population.
I suppose Caroline's 1% figure moved a bit up to 3%, but that's still a pretty large discrepancy.
56.8 trillion is from the 3rd quarter of 2010 compiled stats of the US federal reserve.
Actually, this was really simple if we exclude the children. Subtract the total number of children from the 2010 census pop. I thought about factoring in the unemployed, but I realized being unemployed doesn't mean they don't have a net worth so I left it alone.
308 million - 74.2 children = (308,745,538 - 74,200,000) = 234,545,538 adults
9.8 millionaires + 400 billionaires = 9,800,400 million
percent of population are billion/millionaires: 4.178%
Rough number, but there you have it. Give or take a few more from homeless or honest broke unemployed with $0 net worth, or people with negative net worth - that'd make the percentage go lower actually.
Suggestion #1- Show me where I'm wrong. Nothing in that article suggests I am wrong. Perhaps I missed something?Suggestion #1 - watch the documentary.
Suggestion #2 - read this, it can explain it better than I can. Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power
Sometimes life isn't always about color. And sometimes teaching guitar to homeless addicts with schizophrenia as part of their IOP recovery schedule, is just that.
Thank you for your input, though. I'll pass it on to the Community Behavioral Health board.
I used to have fun debating here with you. Is there a reason you need to get personal?
Yeah, for someone who's first reply to me was:
"Great, just what we need; another misinformed conservative posting biased misinformation. You're going to be real popular around here" at post #13
I'm not sure I would value your opinion on pre-judging or patronizing as much as I would value others here. Especially as you just felt the need to patronize DeafBadger.
Does being a millionaire mean a lot anymore? I would think that having at least $10 million net worth is the new "millionaire" in our society today.
Does being a millionaire mean a lot anymore? I would think that having at least $10 million net worth is the new "millionaire" in our society today.
very good point. I discovered that when I was calculating my retirement needs. I need to save well over a million dollars for retirement. I was astounded. Sadly I have a LONG way to go.
Does being a millionaire mean a lot anymore? I would think that having at least $10 million net worth is the new "millionaire" in our society today.
Mine would be 4.477%. Not gonna quibble on precision. Like I said, between my figures and yours on the differences would be statistically insignificant. I'd say keep it between 4 and 5% since net worth continues to go up as well as the number of billionaires and millionaires as the economy creates more of them after rebounding from 2008 which will see a greater share of control of the total net worth.
However, having said that, people with $500,000 to $999,999 dollars is a very large group that has a controlling chunk of net worth, too. And there are within striking range to hit 1 million. I wouldn't be surprised if combined the number of population would go between 10% and 15%.
The adult millionaires and billionaires population is the 5% percenters that control around 56% of the total net worth in the United States. By saying 1% controls 42% of the total net worth doesn't make math and statistics sense.
I thought being a billionaire was the new millionaire.
I was thinking like 1900s.