Global Rich List • Hacker News Board

Re: Global Rich List

#51

Post by alextingle » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 9:22 AM UTC

apsec112 wrote: post #38

This is an interesting idea, but the numbers are bogus. It says 2% of the world (130M people) makes more than $25,000. This is, however, the median American personal income, so we know that at least 150M Americans make at least that much, plus all the people who do so elsewhere (probably at least another 150M, counting UK, Germany, France, Japan, etc, all the wealthier countries).

I think that's the median gross income of "workers" - people of working age, in the labour market.

You need to subtract your taxes from that, and factor in all of the people who don't count as "workers".

Re: Global Rich List

#52

Post by ZeroGravitas » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 10:12 AM UTC

arjunnarayan wrote: post #15

citricsquid wrote: post #7

I feel conflicted about donating to charity, Kiva(.org) is my money-for-good vehicle of choice but sometimes it feels as if my money could be better spent donating to charities that help people that can't afford to eat, eat. Long term spending of money to help people better themselves and those around them is the more sustainable model but short term helping people that are starving have access to life essentials has…

Part of the nuance of the issue is the difference between "give a man a fish" versus "teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime". There is a moral dilemma between spending money now to feed 100 people versus teaching one person to fish for a lifetime. That is a tough dilemma to solve. But different charities approach this in different ways. The philosophy behind Kiva is to help people build sustainable businesse…

Do you know if the Gates foundation, Kiva or GiveWell have done any research into the effect of a Basic Income (i.e. giving everyone in a country a small amount of money with no strings attached)?

It kind of falls slightly outside the realm of charity, more a Government intervention, but it's also the kind of intervention that I'd expect these rational charities to be interested in.

edit: Looks like GiveWell are interested in the concept:

http://blog.givewell.org/2009/05/20/why-not-just-give-out-ca...

"Why do cash handouts seem to be so rare in the charity world? Perhaps it’s because extensive experience and study have shown this approach to be inferior to others. Or perhaps it has more to do with the fact that giving out cash fundamentally puts the people, rather than the charity, in control."

That's exactly the kind of harsh but almost certainly true commentary I'd expect from a true charity watchdog. My esteem for GiveWell has gone up a few notches as a result.

And one of their charities is a charitable version of the concept (though with major differences e.g. it's one-off, limited to the very poor etc.):

http://www.givewell.org/international/top-charities/give-dir...

Re: Global Rich List

#53

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 10:13 AM UTC

citricsquid wrote: post #9

igravious wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question, if you earn so much (1% you claim) where does all your income go? You're supporting others? You're paying off student loans? Your rent is really really high? Anyway. If you've no accumulated wealth just enter your income and then marvel at the disparity between you and the 99%.

He probably means the global 1% which is ~$30,000 per year, in a lot of first world places that is far from enough to build up wealth without behaving frugally.

[deleted]

Re: Global Rich List

#54

Post by randomdata » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 11:24 AM UTC

citricsquid wrote: post #9

igravious wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question, if you earn so much (1% you claim) where does all your income go? You're supporting others? You're paying off student loans? Your rent is really really high? Anyway. If you've no accumulated wealth just enter your income and then marvel at the disparity between you and the 99%.

He probably means the global 1% which is ~$30,000 per year, in a lot of first world places that is far from enough to build up wealth without behaving frugally.

Even when observing only the USA, a top 1% personal income starts at around $200K, which isn't unheard of for a developer position. A recent poll about age places the majority of HN readers early in their career where debt is usually high and assets have not had much time to accumulate, so a top 1% US income and no assets does not seem like an impossibility either.

Re: Global Rich List

#55

Post by aroman » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 10:53 PM UTC

simcop2387 wrote: post #31

aroman wrote: post #30

Interestingly, the "Maximum income" (USD/year) is 2,200,000,000 (2.2 billion). Specifying a yearly income of 2B/year, however, puts you at #1 according to this. Why 2.2B? Seems rather arbitrary.

Likely a 32bit int rounding issue? 2147483648

Ahh, that must be it. Strange they'd cap it at 2.2B instead of their actual MAX_INT equivalent.