3 ms·

According to this, they also have 10 million in wealth, not only the 160.000 a year. You're probably not in the 1%: "The 1 percent threshold for net worth in t

According to this, they also have 10 million in wealth, not only the 160.000 a year. You're probably not in the 1%: "The 1 percent threshold for net worth in the Fed data was nearly $8.4 million" Source: economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/measuring-the-top-1-by-wealth-not-income/ www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/business/the-1-percent-paint-a-more-nuanced-portrait-of-the-rich.html

twoodfin 13y ago
That's a convenient (at least for the young, upper-income HN demographic) but ahistorical definition. The use of "top 1%" in political rhetoric goes back at least to Al Gore's 2000 campaign for president, as a cudgel against George W. Bush's proposed tax cuts. Gore is quite clear in his October 17 debate that he's talking about income when he speaks of the $330,000 (household) earnings cutoff to be in the 1%[1]. It continued to be a common refrain against upper bracket tax reductions for a decade, and it was still being used in that sense by politicians and activists at the time it graduated into the slogans of Occupy Wall Street. [1] http://www.debates.org/?page=october-17-2000-debate-transcript http://www.debates.org/?page=october-17-2000-debate-transcri...