The Wealthometer

[MasterBlaster]

The Wall Street Journal had an income-based "Rich-O-Meter"

You can see it here:

The Wall Street Journal - WSJ.com

To be in the "1%" You need an income of $507k per year.

 

[NW-Bound]

Uh Oh! Just a quick search on the Web found the following headlines.

"Men are more likely to fib than women, telling on average three lies a day.
Each year this amounts to 1,092 lies as opposed to women who were found to lie 728 times over 12 months."
​

and

Science Proves it: Men Lie More Than Women - CBS News​

How did they count these lies so accurately? And are the researchers men or women?

 

[scrabbler1]

phhhhhht, it showed me nothing readable when I hit the "calculate" button. Just a blank area in the screen.

This was fun hahahaha

 

[arky]

I think you're right, the 1%-ers are the Barron's Penta crowd.

But maybe it's because this is household percentile and the typical household is two individuals? As a rough estimate 10% of households are above the 1M USD threshold, and it's one tenth of the previous level for each 5.5x in net worth. This upper tail power law works out to roughly a half-population per Golden Ratio (1.62x) in net worth. Another way of looking at it, the median household above a threshold X is the Golden Ratio times X.

Huh !?!

 

[marko]

I x-d out the second I saw "how would you tax wealth?".

Another Harvard bow-tie weenie who makes $500K a year who (my guess) won't check the box to be taxed at the optional higher Mass income tax rate himself but wants everyone else to do so.

 

[mpeirce]

Wealth tax

I knew it was coming once I accumulated some...

 

[Amethyst]

Moreover, all fibs are not created equal! We must have a ranking scale for lying, based on the scope of the fib. For example: 1 point for saying someone looks fine, when actually they look terrible; 5 points for saying you need to work late at the office Saturday night; and 10 points for whoppers told by politicians

Amethyst

Uh Oh! Just a quick search on the Web found the following headlines.

"Men are more likely to fib than women, telling on average three lies a day.
Each year this amounts to 1,092 lies as opposed to women who were found to lie 728 times over 12 months."
​

and

Science Proves it: Men Lie More Than Women - CBS News​

How did they count these lies so accurately? And are the researchers men or women?

 

[NW-Bound]

Uh Oh! Just a quick search on the Web found the following headlines.

"Men are more likely to fib than women, telling on average three lies a day.
Each year this amounts to 1,092 lies as opposed to women who were found to lie 728 times over 12 months."
​

and

Science Proves it: Men Lie More Than Women - CBS News​

How did they count these lies so accurately? And are the researchers men or women?

I made the above post in the thread "Give your money to a woman".

How does it end up being here?

 

[comicbookgujy]

Sounds like a scam to encourage taxing of WEALTH! I'm in top 7% but only because I LBYM my entire life and I'll be damned if they try to tax my life saving!

Time to spend it on Hooker and blow if they start taxing wealth.

 

[Arifriekinel]

...

Depending on the rate and structure I could stomach a wealth tax if income taxes went away...

I completely agree. Taxing the same money twice just because you keep it around just doesn't float well with me.

 

[HFWR]

Time to spend it on Hookers [-]and[/-] or blow if they start taxing wealth.

FIFY...

 

[Hermit]

Its really quite simple to figure out. You just have to think like a [-]bank robber[/-] politician... That's where the money is!

 

[marko]

Sounds like a scam to encourage taxing of WEALTH! I'm in top 7% but only because I LBYM my entire life and I'll be damned if they try to tax my life saving!

Time to spend it on Hooker and blow if they start taxing wealth.

"I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women...the other half I wasted" W C Fields.

 

[marko]

Interesting question is whether one should reduce tax-deferred assets by estimated taxes.

Depending on the rate and structure I could stomach a wealth tax if income taxes went away, but since this is associated with a Harvard professor I suppose that the wealth tax would be in addition to an income tax. If that is the case then no thank you - I already paid (substantially) each year as I built my wealth.

The idea would be to tax you on what you earn and then tax you on the earnings you didn't spend.

I'd assume the plan would then be to hand it to those who didn't earn anything and who spent more than you did.

Y'know, income inequality and all that.

Take heart: There's always a work-around!

 

[Gatordoc50]

A net worth of 0 puts you at 13%! Twenty five thousand and you're in the top half. So, it speaks more to the unbridled spending by the majority of Americans. Another flaw is that taxing the wealthy will do absolutely nothing to increase the net worth of those at the bottom.

 

[M Paquette]

A federal wealth tax will never happen in the USA under the current constitution and body of case law. While a couple states have had some sort of 'intangible assets' tax, these tend not to survive very long for some reason or other...

 

[ERhoosier]

A federal wealth tax will never happen in the USA under the current constitution and body of case law.......

That's what many once said about income taxes

 

[Al in Ohio]

That's what many once said about income taxes

Many? No not really. This is totally different and will never happen.

 

[growing_older]

Site prominently displays "None of the data you enter will be stored" yet when I return to the site in a new browser (same machine) it already has my previous entries filled out. So, maybe it's stored only locally on my machine, but it absolutely IS BEING STORED and so now I wonder what else this site is doing or misrepresenting about itself.

 

[FANOFJESUS]

Number 3 is scary how would you tax wealth I think that is coming one day. Do some other countries already have that? Exemption level 50k yeah that will raise some money.

 

[photoguy]

I don't understand why they are simply dividing by the number of people in the household to determine your percentile. This seems like the worst possible way of normalizing the data.

 

[NW-Bound]

Number 3 is scary how would you tax wealth I think that is coming one day. Do some other countries already have that? Exemption level 50k yeah that will raise some money.

Only a few countries have wealth tax right now. However, I saw an article saying that the IMF was advocating a 10% tax (one time, I think) on all Europeans.

Now, imagine if we put this wealth tax to a popular vote. With 50% of people having less than $24K of net worth, what do you think will happen?

 

[calmloki]

Only a few countries have wealth tax right now. However, I saw an article saying that the IMF was advocating a 10% tax (one time, I think) on all Europeans.

Now, imagine if we put this wealth tax to a popular vote. With 50% of people having less than $24K of net worth, what do you think will happen?

I dunno - seems like I remember money mattering more to me when I had less of it. If I only had $24,000 I sure wouldn't want to give up half of it.

 

[NW-Bound]

No, the poorest 50% people will vote to exempt that first $24K of net worth. What's above it will be taxed at 50%.

PS. Talk about the IMF current 10% [-]seizure[/-] tax proposal, I remember that the EU/IMF seized a big chunk out of bank accounts in Cyprus last year. Unimaginable things have happened before.

 

[Fishingmn]

Wouldn't they have to tax the value of a pension plan based on expected payout and longevity? Not sure the unions will suddenly be on board.

And what's to stop someone from blowing all their wealth on an annuity so they show no wealth but get the lifetime income stream instead?