this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
429 points (79.1% liked)

US Authoritarianism

1183 readers
1 users here now

ChonkyOwlbear is an Illegitimate Usurper

There's other groups and you are welcome to add to them. USAuthoritarianism Linktree

See Also, my website. USAuthoritarianism.com be advised at time of writing it is basically just a donate link

Cool People: !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world 218 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (25 children)

That can't be right though... 1000 people isn't nearly enough to drag the average income down 5k BELOW the median income in a nation of over 300 million. It should still be higher due to the long tail on the high side of incomes.

Proof: Average income in top 1% is 819k https://www.unbiased.com/discover/banking/how-much-income-puts-you-in-the-top-1-5-or-10#:~:text=To%20be%20in%20the%20top%201%25%20of%20earners%2C%20you',earn%20an%20average%20of%20%243%2C312%2C693.

Solve the weighted average:

819 * 0.01 + x*0.99 = 74.5

Where x is the remaining average. X≈66.3k, and that's excluding the ENTIRE 1% which is over a MILLION people at least, depending on how you count it. America is big.

[–] bratorange@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

But I think this is only about wages right? It doesn’t take into account growth in net worth based on shares, does it?

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

“Income” is understood to mean wages in measurements like this.

[–] bratorange@feddit.de 2 points 11 months ago

Not sure about this. However if this was the case, income would be a pretty useless term in terms of describing financial inequality, as a lot of wealth gained would be excluded by this definition.

load more comments (22 replies)