• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How rich are you?

You are in the top 0.48% richest people in the world.
There are 5,971,172,435 people poorer than you.


And I spend most of my time bitching how I wish I was filthy rich. I guess I'm a capitalist pig.:D
 
Malachi151 said:
Not the best calculator, but its an interesting estimation.
Click to expand...
This is deceiving, as it equates income with wealth, which is not at all the same thing.

My wife and I have combined higher income than my parents or her parents. So are we richer than our parents? No. Our parents own their homes free and clear, whereas ours is partly owned by the bank.

And our parents have considerably more in savings and other investments than we do.

This is not to say that Americans aren't wealthier as a group than anyone else. But income isn't a proper measure of wealth. Think about that next time you hear your congressweasel trying to buy your mom's vote by decrying the high costs senior citizens have to pay for drugs. He won't mention the inconvenient fact that they may well have NO costs for housing, orthodonture and college for the kids, or commuting expenses. He also won't mention that a significant portion of their income may be tax-free or subject to low tax rates.

High income does not necessarily equate to wealth. And low income does not necessarily equate to poverty.
 
This calculator rates high on the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ meter.

I put in $50,000, and was told that I am the 53,957,565 richest person in the world.

Then I put in $100,000 and was told that I am the 36,007,565 richest person in the world.

This would mean that 17,950,000 people make between $50,000 and $100,000 per year. Yeah, right. I got news for you, there's a LOT more people in that range.

Then, I typed in $10. This was the response:

"Sorry, if you earn less than $90 a year we are unable to calculate your position on the richlist.

If this is the case you would be one of the billions of people who earn less than $2 a day. Typically you would also not have access to a computer or an Internet connection.

If you are earning less than $90 a year it'd be unfair to ask you to donate money to Care International, if however, you actually earn more than this it may be worth re-calculating your position."

So they have decided that I must be lying! Well, yes, I was lying, but to automatically assume that EVERYONE who types in this figure is lying is ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. There are many places in the Third World where people have community access to the internet.

I may be liberal, but I'm not an effete "all-knowing" leftist like these clowns. Pathetic.
 
Kodiak said:


Just remember...

You asked for it! :eek:



;)
Click to expand...
Well, yeah. Lessee, take grenade, pull pin, throw into middle of thread, step back...

To address one thing straight up: Any reference that starts "The American economy is founded on genocide, slavery, opium and tobacco..." goes straight into my shredder (sorry, Malachi151).

My point is that wealth is created, and a lot of people seem to forget that. How much is a handful of sand worth? Practically nothing. How much is it worth if you turn it into a microchip? A lot more. How much is a pile of lumber and bricks worth? Probably a few thousand dollars. How much is it worth if you turn it into a house? A hundred times as much.

There are other countries that have an abundance of the earth's wealth. Why are they not wealthy? Russia has huge oil and gold reserves. Why is it not a wealthy country?

By contrast, there are places that have almost no material wealth. Israel is in the middle of the stinking desert, fer petesake. Why is it prosperous, while its much larger neighbors, many of them floating on oil, don't have remotely near the same standard of living? Hong Kong is one of the most densely-populated places on the earth. Why is it so rich? Why are South Korea and Japan prosperous, when they have little in the way of natural resources?

I think if someone were to go to the trouble of making a list of countries that have long histories of liberal (liberal in the classical sense, not in the "that goddam liberal Ted Kennedy sense")democracies, they'd find that prosperity and democracy go hand in hand. And that despotism and crushing of human rights goes hand in hand with poverty.
 
My income is in the top 1%, but that doesn't say anything about my wealth. My net worth is so far in the hole what most of the world's population would never be able to get it into the black.

This calculator gives a 50% figure for $868.30.

The CIA World Factbook gives a world GDP of $7,900.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/xx.html

Either someone's wrong, or the median and average are quite far apart. (presuming I'm using the right terms.)
 
Maybe they're including dependents? Throwing children into the mix could really distort the figures. I'm not even sure what the total population of Earth is.
 
shemp said:
This calculator rates high on the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ meter.

I put in $50,000, and was told that I am the 53,957,565 richest person in the world.

Then I put in $100,000 and was told that I am the 36,007,565 richest person in the world.

This would mean that 17,950,000 people make between $50,000 and $100,000 per year. Yeah, right. I got news for you, there's a LOT more people in that range.
Click to expand...



Um, that doesn't necessarily follow. It doesn't take into account ties. Sure you might be the 36,007,565 richest person in the world, but then so are many, many other people too. You all make the same amount.
 
Originally posted by Michael Redman This calculator gives a 50% figure for $868.30.

The CIA World Factbook gives a world GDP of $7,900.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/xx.html

Either someone's wrong, or the median and average are quite far apart. (presuming I'm using the right terms.) [/B]
Click to expand...

The Global Rich List site uses $5,000 as the average worldwide annual income, based on a 1999 estimate by the president of the Population Research Institute. I'm not sure how income relates to GDP, but in any case the median will be very far from the average when the income distribution curve looks the way it does.
 
BPSCG said:
My point is that wealth is created, and a lot of people seem to forget that. How much is a handful of sand worth? Practically nothing. How much is it worth if you turn it into a microchip? A lot more. How much is a pile of lumber and bricks worth? Probably a few thousand dollars. How much is it worth if you turn it into a house? A hundred times as much.

There are other countries that have an abundance of the earth's wealth. Why are they not wealthy? Russia has huge oil and gold reserves. Why is it not a wealthy country?

By contrast, there are places that have almost no material wealth. Israel is in the middle of the stinking desert, fer petesake. Why is it prosperous, while its much larger neighbors, many of them floating on oil, don't have remotely near the same standard of living? Hong Kong is one of the most densely-populated places on the earth. Why is it so rich? Why are South Korea and Japan prosperous, when they have little in the way of natural resources?

I think if someone were to go to the trouble of making a list of countries that have long histories of liberal (liberal in the classical sense, not in the "that goddam liberal Ted Kennedy sense")democracies, they'd find that prosperity and democracy go hand in hand. And that despotism and crushing of human rights goes hand in hand with poverty.
Click to expand...

Well said! And the potential for wealth creation is unlimited. This all means that wealth isn't some limited pool, and taking from the pool doesn't leave less for other people. The creation of wealth benefits everyone. I've tried explaining this concept to people like Malachi, but it falls on deaf ears.
 
Valmorian said:



Um, that doesn't necessarily follow. It doesn't take into account ties. Sure you might be the 36,007,565 richest person in the world, but then so are many, many other people too. You all make the same amount. [/B]
Click to expand...

Well according to the site if you make $50,001 you are the 53,957,206 richest, and if you make $49,999 you are the 53,957,924 richest.
 
The best things in life are free. [Odd, that some people call it stealing...:eek: ]
 
Jon_in_london said:
Well, taking off tax and my tube tickets drops me to the 23rd percentile.
Click to expand...

Yes but consider that America is one of the least taxed countries in the world :p
 
That site is only slightly (very slightly) better than the site that used the football field to illustrate income discrepancies in the US.

First of all, income doesn't necessarily equate to wealth.

Secondly, they are using one specific measure of "rich," namely dollars/pounds. Do poor people in the Third World sit around thinking "If only I had more money then I'd be rich?" I doubt it. They certainly don't consider access to computers to have anything to do with wealth and yet it seems that that site think otherwise.

I'm so jaded that it would not surprise me if the people behind sites like that are doing it just trying to make "social justice" types look ridiculous. I truly find it hard to believe that someone would sit down and say "How can I illustrate the differences in wealth in the world? I've got it!" and then come up with that site.
 
Malachi151 said:


Yes but consider that America is one of the least taxed countries in the world :p
Click to expand...

How do you calculate that? Just curious. You'd have to take total GDI and divide that into the total domexstic government receipts or something. Either way it sounds like a lot of work. It also does not sound right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom