quote:

---

Originally posted by The White Whale:
In complete contrast: The Global Rich List

An annual income of $40,000 puts you in the top 3.17% richest people in the world.

An annual income of $1000 still puts you in the top 44.1% richest people in the world.

I must say I feel no remorse for those billionairs.

---

quote:

---

And excluding the value of their homes leaves a deceptively small number of millionaires.
There are a LOT of folks who are "house rich and cash poor".

---

Tons of those on the list are in my area; My zip was number 42. Houses are expensive here, but people aren't that rich... well... not everyone is that rich, I am not. Down the street there are like... houses that could probably go for about 6 million.
 

---

Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
 
Um, they don't have any of mine on that list.

Though where I come from, most of the Packers don't even have million-dollar houses. I wonder what they're doing with all that money...
 

---

Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
 
I find it interesting that Ty Warner (Beanie Babies) is worth more than George Lucas...
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 
I wonder, what it matters to point out that half the world's population lives on a dollar a day, when in my part of the world you'd starve if you only had a dollar a day.

Living in Africa certainly isn't the same as living in America. They have less money to survive, but surviving, and I mean just being alive with food in your belly, is also a lot more expensive in the western world.

Where's the exchange rate?
 

---

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
 
Goody- I found it interesting too that "the Donald" Trump ( ) is just UNDER Steven Spielberg on page 4. Kinda interesting that the Donald makes himself out to be among the biggest of the big hitters in whatever he does- and he doesn't even have as much as Spielberg. Granted, 4 billion is alot, but he's been bankrupted before, and he's more a gambler than a businessman.
 

---

Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
 
Woot! Local hero Tom Golisano on page 9. Interesting contrast reading his background (started a business with $3000 and a credit card) and compare to many of the lower tier folks whose claim to fame on the list is 'inheritance'.
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
The numbers of the beasts: 1 out of every 666 people is a millionaire (0.15% of the world population) as of the end of 2007.

"One in every three millionaires in the world lives in America" (3.3million out of 10million total) seems unlikely as heck considering that there were 8.9million American millionaires at the end of 2005. So the rest of the numbers may be equally screwed up.

[ June 25, 2008, 09:55 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
You seem to think that this is a problem. Would oyu like to explain why?
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
What? That what purports to be an article on economic facts claims that here has been 63% reduction in the number of American millionaires within two years? Or finding humor in the math?

[ June 25, 2008, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
I intended to refer to your first post, actually, with the statistics on billionaires.
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
Useta be just being a billionaire meant somethin'. Nowadays it won't generate enough respect to getcha a decent plate of rissoto.
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
Well? What of it?
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
It's tough to be a billionaire.

[ June 26, 2008, 08:48 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
If you have a point to make, make it. Don't sit about linking stuff.
 

---

Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
Lyr: You don't need much money to survive in America. We through so much stuff away there are people who live out of nothing but what they find in dumpsters. I'm not talking about the homeless either.

I wouldn't do it, but a lot of people who believe they're living ethically/sustainably do it. (I won't even drink expired milk. Eating a loaf of bread, dug out of the trash, no matter how well it's wrapped up, would make me want to throw up.)
 

---

Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
 

quote:

---

Lyr: You don't need much money to survive in America.

---

quote:

---

It costs nearly as much to live a FirstWorld lifestyle in the ThirdWorld as it does in the FirstWorld. In some ways it costs more due to extremely high import taxes.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

It costs nearly as much to live a FirstWorld lifestyle in the ThirdWorld as it does in the FirstWorld. In some ways it costs more due to extremely high import taxes.

---

My impression (from anectotes, admittedly) is that the opposite is true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TL:
My rent is $800 a month. When I lived in Montana, my rent was $400 a month. That's dirt cheap anywhere in this country. So when you're factoring in what it costs just to live, having a roof over your head is step one. So when step one already costs more per month than most people make in a year... you go from there.

According to the Global Rich List, I am in the top 2.59%, and I don't have money to throw around. I pay my bills, carefully. I buy food, I pay for gas, I come out a little bit ahead, but not much. I don't have enough money, for example, to be paying down my debt or building up savings.

Now, it is true that I don't live in a shack, or eat rotten bread, and all that. But what I'd like to know, is what percentage of the world's population does?

The only valid basis for comparison is not how much money we make, it's how well are we able to live, compared to other nations of the world.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Juxtapose:

quote:

---

It costs nearly as much to live a FirstWorld lifestyle in the ThirdWorld as it does in the FirstWorld. In some ways it costs more due to extremely high import taxes.

---

My impression (from anectotes, admittedly) is that the opposite is true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lalo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TL:
My rent is $800 a month. When I lived in Montana, my rent was $400 a month. That's dirt cheap anywhere in this country. So when you're factoring in what it costs just to live, having a roof over your head is step one. So when step one already costs more per month than most people make in a year... you go from there.

According to the Global Rich List, I am in the top 2.59%, and I don't have money to throw around. I pay my bills, carefully. I buy food, I pay for gas, I come out a little bit ahead, but not much. I don't have enough money, for example, to be paying down my debt or building up savings.

Now, it is true that I don't live in a shack, or eat rotten bread, and all that. But what I'd like to know, is what percentage of the world's population does?

The only valid basis for comparison is not how much money we make, it's how well are we able to live, compared to other nations of the world.

---

Europe, particularly Scandinavia, has both the best per-capita income and the highest standards of living in the world. Followed by Japan, I think. America ranks WAY far down the list.

By the way, how the hell did you pay $400 in Montana? I shared a three-story townhouse in Columbus, OH that was literally across the street from OSU, and I paid only $300. I can't believe Montana is a more competitive real estate market.

(And where are you paying $800?)

---

quote:

---

Even excluding the value of their own homes, ~8.9million American households have a net worth (ie assets minus debts) of over a million dollars; ie over 1 in 34 Americans is a millionaire.
Since there are only ~114,384,000 US households, over 1 in 13 Americans live in a millionaire household.

---

quote:

---

By the way, how the hell did you pay $400 in Montana? I shared a three-story townhouse in Columbus, OH that was literally across the street from OSU, and I paid only $300. I can't believe Montana is a more competitive real estate market.

---

I'm sure there are places in Montana with low rent but you'd be surprised at how expensive the Montana real estate market is. I am currently renting the 3 bedroom house I own in Bozeman MT for $1200/month. Paying $400 per month per person is pretty typical in that area.
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
I dunno about you, but half a billion down the drain.....and still no room for my string of polo ponies. sigh...

[ June 05, 2009, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
 

---

Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
I think I could be happy with 2 or 3 million.. enough to retire comfortably and still build my dream home on 40 acres with a 15' high wall (wide enough to walk 2 abreast on) surrounding the whole place...

You know.. simple dreams.
 

---

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
 
I'd be happy if I had a million dollars stashed away and made 5% interest annually. I'd still keep a job and live carefully, but at least I'd know if something came up I'd be ready for it. As it is, if something bad came along I wouldn't be sitting pretty.
 

---

Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
 
A wall that high and that wide would cost more than your total monetary goal, I suspect.

Of course, if you found a place with that wall already built, you could probably pick it up for a song.
 

---

Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
Bob: You think? A wall is pretty simple and doesn't have things like plumbing and electricity to worry about. Then again, I can't remember the last time I priced a wall...
 

---

Posted by CaySedai (Member # 6459) on :
 
There's a house for sale in Rinard, Iowa, for $17,000. (posted at the convenience store in my town, I don't know the condition of the house.)
 

---

Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
 
Some rough calculations - if you had a circular area of 40 acres, the circumference would be about 4680 feet. A 15' by 3' wall would be 45 cubic feet per lineal foot, so the total cubic feet of concrete needed for a solid concrete wall would be about 210k. Converted to cubic yards, 7800.

Even if the concrete costs $100/cubic yard, you could afford to buy it ($780k). However, you can probably get a MUCH better price for such a large order. And you probably don't need the wall to be solid concrete, either. Perhaps you only need 50% of the cubic yardage and only pay $50 for each cubic yard, you're only in for about $200k in concrete.

But how much for rebar, labor, grading and compacting the dirt? Could definitely add up quite a bit. $1 million for a wall that size doesn't seem unreasonable to me. It'd be similar to building nearly a mile of road.

I think you could swing it, in an area with flat well packed earth and low cost for the acreage. (You didn't want this to be in Orange county right?)
 

---

Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
 
scifi: Nah, I'd want it in some place like Iowa.

Any idea what the barbed wire, motion sensing death-lasers and moat would cost?
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
Moats can be cheap. If you were to use the dirt from the moat as part of your wall, you might be able to cut costs a bit.

Barbed wire is famously cheap. That's why it exists.

I imagine the death lasers would need to be refurbs, given your price range.
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
I think ACME prices those things pretty competitively.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
 

quote:

---

By the way, how the hell did you pay $400 in Montana? I shared a three-story townhouse in Columbus, OH that was literally across the street from OSU, and I paid only $300. I can't believe Montana is a more competitive real estate market.

(And where are you paying $800?)

---