
Global Rich List - xs
http://www.globalrichlist.com
======
nwatson
$1 in the US will buy you much less than $1 in Thailand. Raw income
comparisons don't work. $32,400 in San Francisco is poverty (my conjecture)
for a family of four.

At least appeal to something like The Economist's Big Mac index.

~~~
noname123
This is true. But quality of life is much better in US. Even the homeless have
access to shelters and the poor to food stamps. We should be grateful for our
fortunate circumstances instead of being greedy and wanting more.

~~~
f00_
Why is it wrong to be greedy or to "want more"?

~~~
bigd
Because is not going to make you happy, and on the long term is going to
damage the mankind. Keeping the hippy crap out of the discussion, the problem
is that you are already suffering from of the greed of your parents. And for
your sons will be even worst. Problem is that greed, most of the time make you
choose for an easy income vs substantial growth. But the problem is probably
deeper. Someone few days ago suggested this book. I invite you to give it a
try. [http://hn-books.com/Books/A-Guide-to-the-Good-Life-The-
Ancie...](http://hn-books.com/Books/A-Guide-to-the-Good-Life-The-Ancient-Art-
of-Stoic-Joy.htm)

~~~
logfromblammo
Having more is great, up to a certain point.

I think that point is probably after you can buy everything that you ever
wanted for yourself, and still have some left afterward. After that, unless
you actually hire someone to spend your money for you, or you learn to want
bigger and more expensive things, you are turning the economic flow from a
perpetual circulation into a one-way dead end.

------
cylinder
Being "rich" is about wealth, not income! Very frustrating that this argument
is always targeted towards income.

~~~
dkuntz2
Income is a fairly large factor for most people's wealth...

~~~
srdev
Yes it is, but its not the only factor. Its an unneeded proxy, unless you are
specifically addressing relationships between income and wealth.

------
hhjj
When you are "top 1%" you need not to work (income is very misleading).

------
bargl
I think the real point here is for the OP to show that there is a huge
disparity in what we consider to be poor and what people in other countries
consider to be poor.

Sure $1 can get you more in Bolivia or Haiti but things like Playstations and
TVs are WAY more expensive there. Yeah I can get rice and shitty medicine for
$10. But overall high quality items are hard to get.

And yes you don't have wealth, but the potential is there. This just shows
your earning power as compared to others regardless of spending. Even then
your potential is high. Many people in other countries live in shitty one
bedroom homes that are completely open.

It is meant to be a reality check, and yes "rich" is about wealth, but give
yourself 20 years and how will you have spent your potential wealth, I'd argue
that income is a decent indicator of potential wealth...

~~~
beachriot
Thank you. I think some people at nitpicking at what the point of the article
is getting at, but at least you got it.

------
Mchl
I like how I'm in 1% for income, but in 13%-17% in wealth. Fourty more years
and I might be able to own a flat.

------
ramayac
A little outdated... The Salvadorean "Colon"[1] isn't used in that country
since 2001.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_col%C3%B3n](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_col%C3%B3n)

------
tinalumfoil
As much as I appreciate the concept, you need to adjust for buying power for
these numbers to be worth anything.

~~~
phatfish
Well it shows how wealthy you are on a global scale. I expect the average
westerner on $32,000 wont realize they are in the top 1% (globally). It's
certainly interesting to think about, you then realize just how much money
(and power) the super rich have.

------
_random_
Oh really? Please explain this to London real estate market.

------
medecau
ITT: new IP to avg. income db.

