• Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Whenever I see the 1% or 99% numbers when discussing wealth inequality, this fact is the first thing that comes to mind. We need to use decimal points to get to the real ones in power. 1% contains a lot of people who have money, but are still out of the loop as the rest of us, or as Carlin said, “not in the Club”. They are millionaires, but like they say, the difference between a million and a billion is about a billion.

    And that’s US - many Americans are in the 1% in worldwide numbers, with rough income numbers being around half a million income. Again, they may or may not be comfortable depending on their expenses, but having money doesn’t mean you have power. It’s the .1 that is the beginning of that, and the .01 is moving the pieces for everyone.

    (The numbers are just estimates, there’s gray areas everywhere, the point is the top people want us to be yelling at the top middle and ignore what they do.)

    • PastafARRian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Bingo. My entire circle is 1-5%ers, we are privileged and comfortable and not saying we’re not part of the problem. But we’re powerless. Start by eating the richest, by the time you get to me I’m going to guess there won’t be a problem any more…

      • Sineljora@sh.itjust.works
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        “Powerless”, but how many sets of guns/armor can your circle buy? 1000? 10,000? They’re still astonishingly poor and closer to homelessness or kidnapping to El Salvador than being rich. Better to pick a side in the class war, and doing nothing is picking oppression. Eating the rich also includes non-rich wealthy class-traitors.

    • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      Exactly. Millionaires aren’t the problem. That’s why I can’t stand these thought-terminating clichés like “eat the rich.”

      Someone with even several hundred million to their name is dirt poor compared to billionaires.

      • moonlight@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 day ago

        Millionaires aren’t rich, they’re “well off”. (Or maybe not even, it’s possible to have 1M+ in assets and be struggling financially)

        Being rich is a completely different lifestyle. Like you never even think about money, and get people to do your grocery shopping and stuff. Megayachts and private jets, etc.

        • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Well, I guess that depends on how one defines “rich.” To me, it means someone whose passive income exceeds their spending. What you’re describing, I’d call “wealthy - which is one or two steps above that.