3 ms·

> (those with total household investable assets, excluding pensions, retirement plans and property, greater than $1,000,000). Am I reading this wrong, is this

• vondur 3mo ago
  Sure seems like it if you are excluding property.
• fhdkweig 3mo ago
  > total of 4,375 online interviews > Included in this overall total is a sample of 816 High-Net-Worth Looks like about 1/5 are in the trust fund kid category.
• alwa 3mo ago
  You are reading gp’s comment correctly as it was written, but it omits the next line in the source study: > Data for the general U.S. population (including the High Net Worth oversample) were weighted to Census targets for education, age, gender, race/ethnicity, region and household income. They oversampled in major markets where they work and in high-net-worth populations (who they service), but their claims are for the overall US adult population. Oversampling like this is pretty routine in survey research. It improves the precision of any subgroup analyses you might want to do, and, to a first approximation, it doesn’t tend to bias the weighted overall-population claims in one direction or another. I think about it like Google Earth or something. I happen to have much-higher-res imagery of London than of the Cotswolds. That doesn’t mean my view, when zoomed out to “the whole United Kingdom,” is necessarily misleading. It does mean I can additionally make more detailed claims about Piccadilly Circus than about the sheep fields or whatever.