

What Percent Are You? - uptown
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html

======
eroded
Household income is a poor measure in my opinion. If I happen to live with a
roommate who also earns the same as me, am I suddendly twice as wealthy? Of
course not.

As the majority of households have two main income earners, and I live on my
own, it is wrong to compare my income against that of a married couple. I
would be much more interested to compare where my earnings are against
individuals, not households.

~~~
rjbond3rd
Are you sure that the "majority of households have two main income earners"? I
don't have data but most of the families I know are quite the opposite -- a
divorced couple with kids maintaining two separate households, or a single
mom/dad receiving no child support (for whatever reason).

------
instakill
More accurately, this should be called "what percentile are you?"

~~~
sanderjd
That doesn't match the current marketing terminology. This is meant to be
topical, not strictly informational, though I think it succeeds as both.

------
Ergomane
1% all over USA except a few spots in NY (2%) :(

/me needs additional greed or the exchange rate of a few months ago for a
better rating.

Edit: for those of you who were, like me, a bit confused about the purpose of
the whole exercise: There's a related article at
[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/business/the-1-percent-
pai...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/business/the-1-percent-paint-a-more-
nuanced-portrait-of-the-rich.html?_r=1)

~~~
sutterbomb
Did you zoom in to see your percent in DC? Wealthy area there, might not be
the 1%...

~~~
Ergomane
All I can see there is Top 1% from $513,000

~~~
ldd-
Zoom in and check out Stamford, CT.

~~~
Ergomane
Yes, as I said above, 2%

It doesn't seem like the areas are created equal; I'd expect a few more
hotspots elsewhere (California), but so far I haven't found much, but then
again "Data not available for metropolitan areas with fewer than 50,000
households."

------
forgot_password
The color-coding on this map was an interesting choice. Bright, stop-sign red
is used for people whose income is in the top 1%. I almost felt as if being in
the top 1% was a bad thing...

------
olentangy
Why focus on income? It can so fleeting.

I cashed out a bunch of options last year that put me in into seven figures
for ONE YEAR. Next year I'll be making no salary since I "retired" because of
my windfall.

I'm way better off than I was when I was making a low six figure salary, but
by this measure I'll be worse off.

People need to remember that salaries and wealth are dynamic. Most of the
people in the 1% weren't there 10 years ago and certainly won't be there in 10
years.

~~~
napierzaza
I don't understand your reasoning that they won't be there in 10 years. Money
opens doors for you to make more money and to give your kids more
opportunities. Unless you assume that people are essentially all addicted to
gambling.

~~~
olentangy
I shouldn't have said "most". It's more like 34% of the top 20% fall to a
lower quintile over six years according to a Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis study of households from 1002 to 2007.
(<http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/qr/qr3411.pdf>) I should have looked
this up instead of just trusting my memory.

Still pretty significant.

------
polyfractal
Bottom 20% in Boston. Whoo!

------
abeppu
If you live in Alaska or Hawaii, we're unsure which percentile you're in. How
much did you spend on flights and shipping charges last year?

------
natesm
This isn't really a good measure. Given the same income, a single person is
much better off than a family of 5.

------
ux_designer
24% in my area.

