Attention Media: Occupy Wall Street Protesters Are World's Richest One Percent
While the media champion the Occupy Wall Street movement as if it's the American version of the Arab Spring, they're predictably missing a crucial distinction.
As the Motley Fool reported Friday, those sleeping in tents and skipping showers in cities around the country are actually part of the world's richest one percent:
In America, the top 1% earn more than $380,000 per year. We are, however, among the richest nations on Earth. How much do you need to earn to be among the top 1% of the world?
$34,000.
That was the finding World Bank economist Branko Milanovic presented in his 2010 book The Haves and the Have-Nots. Going down the distribution ladder may be just as surprising. To be in the top half of the globe, you need to earn just $1,225 a year. For the top 20%, it's $5,000 per year. Enter the top 10% with $12,000 a year. To be included in the top 0.1% requires an annual income of $70,000.
NewsBusters readers might recognize Milanovic's name as well as his book given a report we did on this issue two weeks ago which presented a chart of income inequality in numerous countries:
Contrary to the current media meme, when adjusted for international dollars as well as cost and standard of living, there is far greater income inequality in Brazil, China, and India.
More importantly as it pertains to the Occupy Wall Street movement, people in the bottom five percent of income here are still richer than 68 percent of the world’s citizens.
As Motley Fool observed:
According to the U.N., "Nearly half the world's population, 2.8 billion people, earn less than $2 a day." According to the World Bank, 95% of those living in the developing world earn less than $10 a day. [...]
In short, most of those protesting in the Occupy Wall Street movement would be considered wealthy -- perhaps extraordinarily wealthy -- by much of the world. Many of those protesting the 1% are, ironically, the 1%.
This goes hand in hand with a great picture created a few weeks ago identifying all the expensive products present at OWS rallies:
Maybe America's media should keep these numbers and images in mind as they cry a river for OWS protesters.
After all, according to the rest of the world, these people should be eating each other.
(H/T Hot Air)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
These people are dupes in the
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:29am.
These people are dupes in the big scheme of things.
The term...
Submitted by ontheright on Mon, 10/31/2011 - 11:50am.
..."useful idiots" comes to mind.
For those who've not seen this, you may want to invest the few minutes it will take to get a more clear understanding of what we are actually up against.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMZGGQ0ERk
This is an eye-opening interview that sheds light on exactly what we have been seeing happening for years...no doubt the basis for the radical liberal agenda - perpetuated by academia, the AGW crowd, radical environmentalism, entitlement "whores", etc. etc. etc.
Obowmaolinsky is just another pawn being used as a "means to an end".
I guess it is ok then
Submitted by coin of the realm on Mon, 10/31/2011 - 7:36pm.
Let's just continue to allow the super rich and their paid for gov minioins to run this country like their own private company until we can say with accuracy in a global context that our income disparity and poverty levels are truly bad.
BTW, comparing nominal income levels is meaningless. Without adjusting for cost of living and services provided wihout cost it is not a basis for comparison.
Besides, being the richest and best country on earth I think we should have a higher standard than just being better than dirt poor people.
Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws. Mayer Amschel Rothschild
*zwoooooooooosh*
Submitted by kata on Mon, 10/31/2011 - 7:49pm.
That's the sound of this blog entry going over your head.
I'd argue the point, but your continued proven willful ignorance robs me of the motivation to do so.
The pie (is still) a lie.
I posted this elsewhere, but I bring it back just for
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 10/31/2011 - 9:17pm.
small change. A short list of the sponsors, endorsers and organizers of the whole Occupy BS. Seems it isn't the all-American group that Hugo Small Change thinks it is.
Is anyone surprised that Small Change wants to re-distribute everyone else's income?
Flaw in the logic?
Submitted by howiem on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 7:29pm.
I agree that the protests should be in DC and not Wall Street (after all, it is DC that manipulates the rules, and takes money from lobbyists, etc., there is still a flaw in the logic of this article. A person who can afford to pay for a cost-inflated university education might be in the 1%, but since one of the major gripes seems to be the student loan debt, how does being in debt make them 1 percenters?
Welcome, and congrats on your first post, Howie.
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 7:52pm.
Even though you've been a member for 5 years. We know, we know, you read the posts a lot, you just don't post a lot, right?
To answer your question vis-a-vis the "99%" and their student loans, you seem to be confused. The Occuturds are not, repeat, NOT, the 99%, they are in fact the 1%. The 1% of the population, who think that, because they chose to get a liberal arts degree, or a degree in women's studies, international relations, or underwater basket weaving, we, hard working people, should be on the hook for their student loans, and we should make sure that they have a job, beginning at, oh, say, $75K a year. Or, we should work, so they can sit around on the a$$ and collect a "living wage"? I think not, Sparky.
And, the 400 top millionaires/billionaires should each kick in a million dollars? That goes to show how royally stupid the Occuturds are, as has been mentioned, that comes out to about $1.21, per person. That won't pay the interest on their LL Bean credit card, where they charged their tents and "hiking" boots for their stint at Occuturd Central.
Flaw in the logic?
Submitted by howiem on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 8:03pm.
Try rereading my post. If someone is in debt, how does that make them a 1 percenter?
Reading comprehension is your friend, try it sometime.
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 8:21pm.
BUt, just for you, 5 year lurker, again "The 1% of the population, who think that, because they chose to get a liberal arts degree, or a degree in women's studies, international relations, or underwater basket weaving, we, hard working people, should be on the hook for their student loans, and we should make sure that they have a job, beginning at, oh, say, $75K a year". I realize it's tricky, but I was saying they are not, in fact, part of the 99%, that they are, in fact, 1% of the population who haven't a clue, lazy leeches, those who want to get paid a "living wage" for breathing. Get it yet? Lot's of the posters at NB don't buy the Occuturd eye wash that they represent the 99% of this country.
You said, "1% of the
Submitted by howiem on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 8:45pm.
You said, "1% of the population who haven't a clue, lazy leeches, those who want to get paid a "living wage" for breathing". There are far more than 1% of the population who fit that description. By some polls 20% or so of the population claim to be socialists, and probably at least 40% (not including batteries and dead bodies) will vote for Obama (again). And please spare the snide comments.