I was party to an interesting discussion in which it was pointed out that based on world wide incomes the threshold for the top 1% of earners started at about $40 000 p.a.

Perhaps the greens as one of the wealthiest groups should be protesting against themselves?

how about 300000 to 400000 presenters on abc spreading victimhood and marxism.

leave a zero out SM? forty grand is not the right figure if it was it would be the top eighty percent.
Nice kick in the ribs for the greens however but if they only earned that they would belong in my battlers party.

he's on the money for world 1% . The national minimum income for the top 1 percent in the U.S. is $421,926, according to a new report.
It may explain why some risk their lives in Indonesian fishing boats but probably not always "refugees" in the Nazi escapee sense.

Nah Shadow, too busy watching the Coalition misfits in Canberra wrecking Australia. Now how much is ScumMo paying himself, $527,862 wow! The blokes a joke, the Liberal party is a joke and not worth 2 cents.

Now its been revealed the Liberals demolition partner, the National party is crawling with Nazi's. They might kick out a token few, but the majority will keep their guernsey. Do you think those booted by the Nats will be welcomed into the extreme faction of the Liberal Party to chew the fat with the like minded. For all we know they could even be candidates at the next election. Are you in agreement if they win they should get a big pay packet to put them in the top 0.1% of earners?

Another interesting statistic I came across recently is that people on average incomes in the west are, in terms of real wealth, in the top 0.0001% of all people who've lived in the last two millennia.

It truly is a golden age.

A shame so many don't see it or understand how it happened.

Yes i don't understand it. You say there were 30,000 people before today who had an average western income. So before 1930 , all of the US , British empire , nobility of all nations , Romans, blah blah produced 30, 000 rich people.

Belly and NNN,

I was talking worldwide not just Aus or the US where wages are much higher.

Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day

Welcome to the 1% mate.

So you support Greens' interests in global concerns for environment and less militarism?

SM do not push this wheel barrow too far mate
it is upside down.
the one percent are the mega rich.
some how you got the wrong story

Belly
Hate Trump , hate Islam, OK done that.
Australia is part of the world. Australia is a small part . Of the world. The world has many people , some are Trump some are Muslim. Some of the Trumps are bigbelly fat rich like oil sheiks. Some are not. Rich.

nicknamenick ok but this thread is based on a misreading of the true one percent.
the number given as income would, even in a world flooded with truly poor, not be even close to right.
in the end fair distribution of wealth will never take place

You are correct. The 1% is in blogs but a fact check shows it's wrong.
Roughly , China has 200 million and US 100 million people above that income so maybe it should be 10% of world.

I suspect the maths will elude Belly but let's try.

A percentage is a relationship between two numbers. 1% is 1/100th OF SOME OTHER NUMBER.

Just saying 'the 1%" as though is a value unto itself is utterly innumerate.

So its 1% of something. If that 'something' is Australia then the top 1% has a very high wealth of around $3 million and income of around $200k.

In a somewhat richer country like the US the top 1% would have a higher again wealth/income level.

But what if that 'something' is the world. By adding Nigerians and Venezuelans and Chinese to the pool, the price to get into the top 1% falls to around $A 40000. So most Australians are in the top 1% of the world in terms of wealth and income.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-need-34k-income-global-elite--half-worlds-richest-live-U-S.html

"The proportion of the world's wealthiest people living in China, India, Russia and Africa is statistically insignificant, according to Mr Milanovic."
Has to be wrong . About 20% Chinese earn above 200,000 yuan , $40,000. That's around 2.5% world people.

Who cares? I get an age part-pension and manage just fine with that and the bit I managed to save. I'm quite happy for the top 1% to get everything they want, including the ulcers that go with it.

My beef, if I had one, would be with Mongrel Morrison making it harder for seniors when he was treasurer.

Belly old mate, this is one case where your ideology is making it impossible to see the truth. Math is always true, ideology rarely so.

When your ideology & the math are incompatible, ditch the ideology or be a fool, as it is the math which will be correct.

Hasbeen
Just one bit of maths would be welcome . please.

Maths are my strong point Hasbeen see however not yours.
can without a calculator tell you how many super feet of timber is on a truck
lost art but helped me no end in my youth.

NNN,

If the greens had any genuine policies I might be able to give you an answer. All I can find is vague collection of feel good wish lists.

As for any form of global government / redistribution I would have to pass, as most of the really poor countries are far poorer than they were under the colonial yoke due to the incompetence and corruption of their "elected" governments.

Who is rich and poor is distorted by barriers over national borders and other effects. Many in Australia may feel poorer than some in poorer countries despite their higher per capita income. It's more relevant an many cases to compare people within nations than between individuals in different nations. In economics supply and demand is the driver- decreasing the demand decreases the supply price. For the lower quartiles of the population accommodation is a significant proportion of income. Reducing the population would increase standards of living due to decreased property demand. Transport is also a significant cost and necessary component of business and infrastructure- so careful thought is required for the nations stability.