3 ms·
> So, which part of what you wrote was the opposite of what I wrote? The part where you said any group of people, and I said a very wealthy group of people.
by rektide 5y ago
> So, which part of what you wrote was the opposite of what I wrote?
The part where you said any group of people, and I said a very wealthy group of people.
- vmception 5y agoI think there are at least 400,000 Californians (1%) that are wealthy enough and flexible enough to be in that global 0.03% cohort you mentioned
- rektide 5y ago> that the world’s wealthiest 1% is not entirely made up of billionaires, but contains a significant number of people whose assets amount to $759,900 or over. Indeed, there are only 123,000 ultra high net worth individuals (defined as those whose assets exceed $50 million) worldwide. As a group, however, they lay claim to 45% of the world’s wealth. [1] In this regard, although your estimate is wildly vastly over-optistic, I tend to agree with your premise. Yes, around 400k Californians probably do pose a vast & significant threat to global order & probably are one of the biggest most exploitative & dangerous forces on the planet. This particular state is home to people vastly more compensated than anywhere else. And they will wreak havoc upon the lower priced markets they seek to exploit & live well amongst. [1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/who-are-the-1-the-answer-might-surprise-you/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/who-are-the-1-the-ans...