> Today, the top 1% control fully half of the planet's wealth. I've seen that statement debated, so I was curious if it was actually true. I had to follow quit

> Today, the top 1% control fully half of the planet's wealth. I've seen that statement debated, so I was curious if it was actually true. I had to follow quite a few links before I hit bedrock. Garret links to an NPR piece[1], which links to an Oxfam "study"[2], which references a Credit Suisse report[3], which is 64 pages long and covers way more than global wealth inequality. I finally found the relevant bit on page 10, in a section named, "Distribution of wealth across individuals": > Our estimates for mid-2013 indicate that once debts have been subtracted, an adult requires just USD 4,000 in assets to be in the wealthiest half of world citizens. However, a person needs at least USD 75,000 to be a member of the top 10% of global wealth holders, and USD 753,000 to belong to the top 1%. Taken together, the bottom half of the global population own less than 1% of total wealth. In sharp contrast, the richest 10% hold 86% of the world’s wealth, and the top 1% alone account for 46% of global assets. Finally! Can the author please link to that instead? It would have saved me so much time. So the statement is mostly true, except note that debt is counted. That means a significant fraction of people have negative net worth. Those trading against future earnings (using student loans, car loans, mortgages, etc) will be at the bottom of the wealth distribution. Remember, this is world wealth inequality, not US wealth inequality. What does US wealth look like? According to page 46 of the Credit Suisse report, 40% of US adults are in the top decile of wealth distribution. Heck, 7.5% of US adults are in the top 1% of wealth owners worldwide. There's a graph of US wealth distribution compared to the world.[4] It shows the US as a much more balanced place. More than anything else, "The top 1% control half the world's wealth." is a statement about the inequality of nations, not people. Unless one is advocating wealth taxes to finance foreign aid, it's disingenuous to further a domestic agenda by citing the impoverished masses in developing countries. I think if Garret took the time to be more rigorous, he could build a very good critical companion to PG's essay. But in its current state, it's not something I can really engage with. 1. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/01/20/264241052/oxfam-worlds-richest-1-percent-control-half-of-global-wealth http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/01/20/264241052/... 2. It's just a short overview of others' research: https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/bp-working-for-few-political-capture-economic-inequality-200114-summ-en.pdf https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/bp-working-f... 3. https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=BCDB1364-A105-0560-1332EC9100FF5C83 https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fi... 4. http://geoff.greer.fm/photos/screenshots/Screen%20Shot%202016-01-05%20at%2009.14.40.png http://geoff.greer.fm/photos/screenshots/Screen%20Shot%20201...