US is a poor country

[thepupil]

22 minutes ago, LC said:

 

 

The disparity between mean and median makes the point here.

 

The US isn't a rich country - but it's top 1% of citizens certainly are the richest.

 

Or to tell a story: Bezos is filthy rich because millions of warehouse employees are forced to work thru hurricanes and tornadoes, his delivery drivers have to urinate in gatorade bottles, they're labeled contractors to avoid paying for healthcare and insurance, etc. etc. 

 

i don't really agree here. The wealth of the US extends well beyond the top 1% (you need like $12 million to be top 1%). the US has a big population of mass affluent in the top 1.01%-25% too. pretty much anyone with a decent job can accumulate wealth (not like $12 million but like $1mm and a house and social security) that is really really globally competitive if not the most wealthy in the world. Dollar is king.

 

the top 0.1% and top 1% are obviously far wealthier than some 65 year old with a paid off house, $1mm in IRA and $2-$3K/month of social security, but that 65 year old on a global basis is fabulously wealthy. his life certainly not glamourous or "lavish" but it's "wealthy"

 

Edited 5 hours ago by thepupil

[Sinbius]

24 minutes ago, thepupil said:

 

... some 65 year old with a paid off house, $1mm in IRA and $2-$3K/month of social security, but that 65 year old on a global basis is fabulously wealthy...."

 

 

Fantasy example...

 

The median retirement savings for a U.S. household (and it  counts 2 people if family of husband and wife) aged 65 to 74 is $200,000, according to the latest ⁠Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) 

 

The median net worth for Americans aged 65–74 is $410,000. (include house, savings etc...)

Edited 5 hours ago by Sinbius

[LC]

16 minutes ago, thepupil said:

the top 0.1% and top 1% are obviously far wealthier than some 65 year old with a paid off house, $1mm in IRA and $2-$3K/month of social security, but that 65 year old on a global basis is fabulously wealthy. his life certainly not glamourous or "lavish" but it's "wealthy"

 

Sure, but there's a reason the US median wealth is so much lower than similar countries and when compared to US average wealth. It's because the bottom end is so much poorer and voluminous, it brings down the median. 

[thepupil]

26 minutes ago, Sinbius said:

 

Fantasy example...

 

The median retirement savings for a U.S. household (and it  counts 2 people if family of husband and wife) aged 65 to 74 is $200,000, according to the latest ⁠Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) 

 

The median net worth for Americans aged 65–74 is $410,000. (include house, savings etc...)

 

I was specifically discussing a member of the "mass affluent" the top 2-20%. this particular person would be a 90th percentile or top 10% or so american, but wasn't necessarily in  high earning career. many teachers or nurses or accountants or generic corporate workers or police officer or firefighters (they'd have a bigger pension) or what have you would fall into this category IF they're responsible, stay married, are able to work long careers etc. these people are globally wealthy, but just look "normal" or "middle class" 

 

my grandpa died with $5 million @ 95 and was just a boring middle manager at AT&T from flyover who saved some decent percentage of his income...by no means a member of the "ruling class" or elite...but privileged enough to go to flagship state universtiy after WWII and have a job...he didn't buy his first house until in his 40's and my dad got his own bedroom in high school*

 

I was not discussing the median. I'm discussing the petite millionaires of USA which are quite numerous and from all over the country....that's my point.

 

it's a caricature to say only top 0.1% or 1% has any wealth in USA. in several states, abut 10% have $1mm liquid (excluding houses)

 

*one thing underappreciated about the US is our stock and RE markets haven't gone to $0 in our existence so wealth accumulated over generations from steady saving and productivity has made a decent %age (not all obviously) pretty wealthy...those with a few generations of ancestry and a little luck and hard work should be in the US top 10% and global top 1%....not to mention the many people who start from nothing and get there in just 1 or 2 generations....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by thepupil

[thepupil]

I also think US wealth shows up in places that aren't NW: plenty of people out there with low net worthw who by global standards live in gigantic homes, drive incredibly fancy vehicles, lavish themselves with prepared foods on the regular, heat and cool their homes with cheap abundant energy in a very luxurious way etc.

[Gregmal]

Again, I fail to see why any sort of aspect of this matters to anyone. Is one's self esteem pegged to this or something? 

[Sinbius]

24 minutes ago, thepupil said:

 

I was specifically discussing a member of the "mass affluent" the top 2-20%. this particular person would be a 90th percentile or top 10% or so american, but wasn't necessarily in  high earning career. many teachers or nurses or accountants or generic corporate workers or police officer or firefighters (they'd have a bigger pension) or what have you would fall into this category IF they're responsible, stay married, are able to work long careers etc. these people are globally wealthy, but just look "normal" or "middle class" 

 

my grandpa died with $5 million @ 95 and was just a boring middle manager at AT&T from flyover who saved some decent percentage of his income...by no means a member of the "ruling class" or elite...but privileged enough to go to flagship state universtiy after WWII and have a job...he didn't buy his first house until in his 40's and my dad got his own bedroom in high school*

 

I was not discussing the median. I'm discussing the petite millionaires of USA which are quite numerous and from all over the country....that's my point.

 

it's a caricature to say only top 0.1% or 1% has any wealth in USA. in several states, abut 10% have $1mm liquid (excluding houses)

 

*one thing underappreciated about the US is our stock and RE markets haven't gone to $0 in our existence so wealth accumulated over generations from steady saving and productivity has made a decent %age (not all obviously) pretty wealthy...those with a few generations of ancestry and a little luck and hard work should be in the US top 10% and global top 1%....not to mention the many people who start from nothing and get there in just 1 or 2 generations....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OK...you are mostly right...but just to be fair...The probability of a first marriage ending in divorce in the United States is currently estimated between 40% and 43%...

 

If you save and invest in EU you become millionaire too ...

Yes it is true in America there are more millionaire in %...isn't that mainly because American stock market return are bigger and you are "forced" to invest in IRA ? (if you capitalize EU state pension difference decrease I guess...)...there are other reasons but that account for a lot...

Edited 4 hours ago by Sinbius

[Sinbius]

18 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Again, I fail to see why any sort of aspect of this matters to anyone. Is one's self esteem pegged to this or something? 

 

I fail to see why you are posting in this thread...just to push your posts number and appear in the "high contribution" or what?

 

This is like talking of macro economy or politics...the big difference between average and median wealth in US has its weight and consequences...and for some it is an interesting dynamic...

 

What about freedom of speech? are you communist? If you are not interested just move on...

Edited 4 hours ago by Sinbius

[Gregmal]

5 minutes ago, Sinbius said:

the big difference between average and median wealth in US has its weight and consequences

Clearly, given the outperformance of the rest of the world vs the US....

[Sinbius]

2 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Clearly, given the outperformance of the rest of the world vs the US....

 

Now who seems to have his self esteem pegged to this thread?  

[Gregmal]

1 minute ago, Sinbius said:

 

Now who seems to have his self esteem pegged to this thread?  

By referencing that your statement is “factually” as wrong as can be? Just look at the chart/numbers. 

Speaking of puffing post counts and being over invested in a topic…how soon til what? 20% of your entire posting history is trying to argue this rather arcane and flawed data of yours in this thread lmfao? 

 

[Sinbius]

5 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

By referencing that your statement is “factually” as wrong as can be? Just look at the chart/numbers. 

Speaking of puffing post counts and being over invested in a topic…how soon til what? 20% of your entire posting history is trying to argue this rather arcane and flawed data of yours in this thread lmfao? 

 

You keep posting in a thread you have no interest in...are you okay? 

Edited 4 hours ago by Sinbius

[Jaygo]

Having been to 40 states and counting and spending my 20's rolling through America on vacations and work trips I would say the US is an incredibly rich country. The accumulated equity is by far the highest in the world in both man made and the natural. 

 

 The middle of nowhere towns and cities that spring up are endless with their sprawling lawns and perfect middle class brick homes. Anyone who has been to New England knows America is spectacularly wealthy. 

 

The thing that sticks out in the US is that millions are poor and compared to Canada and some of Europe the poor get left behind. I don't know if it is spite or just a generally less socialist mentality but the amount of toothless, homeless and general destitute people you find feels third world. 

 

I was in Virginia a few years ago and stopped for gas in an utter destitute community where the cars were shitboxes and the people were poor and uneducated. 5 minutes down the road and I was in another small community that was upper middle and looked healthcare or pharma focused. A few miles separated the American dream from a town that looked like it could be Nicaragua.  

 

I've had similar experiences in Albuquerque, upstate New York and the farm communities of Cali. 

 

 

[thepupil]

1 hour ago, Gregmal said:

Again, I fail to see why any sort of aspect of this matters to anyone. Is one's self esteem pegged to this or something? 

I think it’s incredibly important. You need a big portion of society to feel invested, to feel like capitalists, to have ownership. Otherwise risk of pitchforks, seizure, and drastic redistribution and capital destruction increases. At a point of inequality/if I saw things going this way, I’d consider fleeing the US (which statistically more people are but for affordability reasons)

Edited 2 hours ago by thepupil

[backtothebeach]

11 minutes ago, thepupil said:

You need a big portion of society to feel invested, to feel like capitalists

Like this?  https://investamerica.org/

[thepupil]

11 minutes ago, backtothebeach said:

Like this?  https://investamerica.org/

 

yes, big fan, have opened them for my kids, 1 of whom got $1,000...put in $5K for each and intend to build them some nice little future IRA's along with the $35K 529 thing...i think it's a small little token and honestly the accounts aren't that great unless you use them as wealthy people will: to create future roth conversion opps w/o earned income

 

also love the program because it creates a very simple and efficient way for wealthy people / corps to just give their money to people w/o any kind of government or non profit program / management....middleman...like childless heirs can just give it to trump accounts and give everyone a cent or a dollar and over time that could be quite powerful...but would need to be big...Mr. Dell and crew can't do it alone. 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by thepupil

[Gregmal]

47 minutes ago, thepupil said:

I think it’s incredibly important. You need a big portion of society to feel invested, to feel like capitalists, to have ownership. Otherwise risk of pitchforks, seizure, and drastic redistribution and capital destruction increases. At a point of inequality/if I saw things going this way, I’d consider fleeing the US (which statistically more people are but for affordability reasons)

Sure, but we dont need to be all that concerned by whats obviously(and already been pointed out as) mangled and misinterpreted data. Whether it's dishonestly/ignorantly presented aside. 

 

Its like those oil guys talking about "only 43 days inventory left in the SPR!"....

Edited 2 hours ago by Gregmal

[thepupil]

11 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Sure, but we dont need to be all that concerned by whats obviously(and already been pointed out as) mangled and misinterpreted data. Whether it's dishonestly/ignorantly presented aside. 

 

I've not seen data to the contrary that indicates your median or bottom quartile American has much in the way of assets....i think the data is "mostly" correct....whether its $70K or $150K that's still kind of jack shit.

 

i don't see why the nuances of that aren't worth discussing.

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by thepupil

[Gregmal]

Just now, thepupil said:

 

I've not seen data to the contrary that indicates your median or bottom quartile American has much in the way of assets....i think the data is "mostly" correct....whether its $70K or $150K that's still kind of jack shit. 

 

 

Sure, they dont. Is this something new? Theres literally tons of great businesses, like say Apple or Amazon, they feed off the folks whom blow thru or spend 1.2x every dollar they get their hands on. We live in a consumer centric society, as has been mentioned upthread. 

[thepupil]

20 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Sure, they dont. Is this something new? Theres literally tons of great businesses, like say Apple or Amazon, they feed off the folks whom blow thru or spend 1.2x every dollar they get their hands on. We live in a consumer centric society, as has been mentioned upthread. 

 

yes, this is one potential explanation....that most people are exercising their freedoms and choosing  to be poor. That would generally reflect better on the US than the other explanation which that the bottom 1/2 or whatever can't accumulate wealth due to lack of opportunity or because we need to build more houses or whatever. definitely think americans consumer-y ways are part of it (my own wealth accumulation is certainly slowed by my lavish expenditures), but not sure if it's the only reason. 

 

 

[Red Lion]

4 hours ago, Sinbius said:

Most of these people  are women...are you saying the problem is women? (...just seeing if you fall for it...joking...  )

 

The facts are pretty tenuous for your sexist joke. Factoring in for single parent households, I suspect there's more men on these means/asset tested programs, but it's a moot point. 

 

The public benefits trap applies to men and women. There are plenty of men and women in the USA that can't fund a savings account or try to get a 20% raise because the benefits cliff is insurmountable without a very large one time increase in income (to replace subsidies). People do dig out through education (which is typically how one gets a very large one time increase in income), and there are actually pretty generous means tested subsidies for education as well. 

[Red Lion]

5 hours ago, Sinbius said:

That's a very bad take.

 

ChatGDP answered 48% to the question "what percentage of Americans work full time?" because it was looking at the entire U.S. population rather than just active workers...

 

The real answer is about 82% of all employed workers in the United States work full time...The remaining 18% work part time..

 

 

 

 

 

That's the real answer to a different question. What's your point? People generate net worth typically by working, and in some cases by inheritance. Your link that you started the subject with is using entire US population for median and mean net worth, right? 

 

I suspect if you wanted to ask the median net worth of active workers, you'd end up with a much higher number than the one you cited.