this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2022
16 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7178 readers
491 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yes but are they included? If the top .1% become richer, does the graph go up?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh I see, I would imagine they're not since the top .1% aren't making money from wage labour. These people make profit from their capital. They're the actual capitalists in the country.

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But the USA's expert pay is also completely disproportionate. Meaning the 1%/.1% of wage earners earn very high wages that doesn't exist in the same sphere as the average person's wage.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The gulf between high paid wage labourers and the truly rich is astronomical. A highly paid professional is far closer to a homeless person in terms of wealth than to the 0.1% that owns the country. Here's a good breakdown https://economics.princeton.edu/working-papers/top-wealth-in-america-new-estimates-and-implications-for-taxing-the-rich/

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yes I understand, but the difference between a 15K/yr wage (USA mode wage) and a 300M/yr wage (Highest wage I found quickly, Sundar Pichai) is still big enough to impact statistics.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Sure, but in the end we end up looking at the median wage, and that's going down when considered in the context of purchasing power.