Top 1%?

[pj.mask]

I never understood what exactly this income number is. Taxable income? If I get $40k*2 in tax deferred compensation or non vested stock options of 50k or something is that part of the equation? What about investment income? If I have $2mill and the market goes up 20% I’m almost 1% without working?

[RobbieB]

Yup. Any way you make 400 grand a year makes you a 1% er.

10 mil in net worth or 400 grand / year in income. Of course more is always better!

[king smoothie]

I still struggle with the idea that because others are doing better than you that is somehow harms you. I just don't "feel" harmed, and my experience indicates no harm to me. The conclusion of the study is that the top 1% are doing better at the expense of everyone else, rather than just stating they had more gains. Like it is a zero sum game.

[kcowan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by corn18 Top 1% by income is $430,600 for a household. Top 1% by NW is $10,374,030. I make way more than the income number but fall way short on the NW number. I got me some savin' to do!

Quote:

Originally Posted by COcheesehead I might make the income number this year, but that is one year out of my 55 years on the planet. I have about half the NW.

Maybe not ready to retire yet. RE demands a balance between employment earnings and net worth.

[CaliKid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pj.mask I never understood what exactly this income number is. Taxable income? If I get $40k*2 in tax deferred compensation or non vested stock options of 50k or something is that part of the equation? What about investment income? If I have $2mill and the market goes up 20% I’m almost 1% without working?

I would say it's gross taxable income but I suppose people can use any number they want. Since it doesn't "matter" if you are a 1%'er or not a 1%'er.

I'd like to be a 1%'er and not let my friends know it!

[exnavynuke]

I'm not in the top 1%. I wouldn't mind the money, as then I'd be able to save so much more and FIRE sooner, but I'm not chasing new, higher paying jobs these days.

[exnavynuke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcowan Maybe not ready to retire yet. RE demands a balance between employment earnings and net worth.

I'd say that RE demands a balance between expenses and income producing investments (i.e. their portfolio plus anything else that generates an income for them, pension etc).

A person spending $30k/year with a $250k job and $1M portfolio can afford to retire, even though their portfolio is only 4 times earnings. The same person living the same lifestyle costing $30k, but with a $40k/year job and $160k portfolio (still 4 times earnings) cannot safely afford to retire.

[kgtest]

Quote:

Originally Posted by king smoothie I still struggle with the idea that because others are doing better than you that is somehow harms you. I just don't "feel" harmed, and my experience indicates no harm to me. The conclusion of the study is that the top 1% are doing better at the expense of everyone else, rather than just stating they had more gains. Like it is a zero sum game.

Whenever that feeling of "oh boy they are doing much better" approaches my psyche, I remind myself, no they aren't, they are just doing it DIFFERENT.

Better is in the eye of the beholder, sort of like its hard for me to answer the question "how does it taste?" Well, depends, my mouth is different than yours.

[YVRRocketSurgery]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mdlerth I click on these threads and polls dealing with comparisons, even though I know better. They are fiscal empty calories, providing some momentary guilty pleasure but making not a whisker's difference to my own situation. Whether I'm in the top X% or the bottom X% shouldn't matter. I'm not living anybody else's life, so what they do and what they have is their business, not mine.

On one hand, yes, it's kind of a superficial, ego type ranking thing.
But on the other hand, there are policy implications, like taxation and benefits. Everyone wants to tax "the rich" but so there's a need to look at stats to help define.

[Mdlerth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by YVRRocketSurgery But on the other hand, there are policy implications, like taxation and benefits. Everyone wants to tax "the rich" but so there's a need to look at stats to help define.

Roger that. There's no end of people who can't wait to tax the rich. And history suggests it will never be enough.

But it's not clear that defining "the rich" constitutes anything besides an entirely arbitrary threshold of prosperity. Is there anything magic about one percent of the population? Why not the top point-oh-oh-six percent or thirteen-point-seven percent? One percent is a handy concept for sloganeering, but there's nothing fundamentally scientific about it.

The income and wealth curves get extremely skewed at the upper end of the distribution. My wife's neurologist probably sneaks into the 1% earning ~400k, but that's poverty compared to a Megacorp CEO making forty million. And that difference is WAY larger than the difference between the neurologist and a household earning the median.

Of course, it's because the topic is so subjective that I find it so salacious. It's akin to a sugar high, only less fattening.

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by copyright1997reloaded Gotta move to Rio Grande City, TX and then 122K gets ya in the top 1% of income earners.

have you ever been there?

i went dove hunting around rio grande city about 30 years ago

it was so hot the soles of my boots fell off in the field, no joke

[VanWinkle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by samclem But, why look at just America? Let's be "world citizens" for a moment. To be in the top 1% of the world, you need: 1) an income of $32,400 2) a net worth of $770,000 That's the top 1%. Nearly everyone living in the US is quite well off (materially) by world standards and certainly by historical standards. Do we feel better now? Honestly, I don't. To think that the majority of the world still lives in abject poverty is not much to smile about. The median net worth for adults worldwide is $3,582. That's how much it takes to be doing better than most people. In Africa, it is $438. The good news is that wealth and living standards in some of the world's poorest places are improving. Note, these figures were from a few years ago.

It is good to know that our system works most of the time, even though you would never know that from the news you hear.

We have little control over the rest of the world.

[YVRRocketSurgery]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mdlerth Rich is anybody who can afford stuff I can't