SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: energyplay who wrote (25310)11/11/2002 8:13:09 AM
From: Moominoid  Read Replies (1) of 74559
 
Basically I agree with your points...

Most income over 100k has a significnat non- salary component - investment gains & incomes, roylaties, real estate deals, etc. There are about 3+ millon millionaires in the US, about 1% of the popultaion...

I think the millionaire number is nearer 5million (maybe it is lower post bubble burst). Those are millionaire households which means about 5% of households. A lot of their wealth is in housing of course, so the return on their remaining capital is not going to push them too high up the income distribution. It's much more common to be a millionaire than earn $250,000 per year, especially as a salary rather than business income.

Way less than 1 % make 250 k -

The income distribution is not gaussian or even log normal -it's lumpy.


It certainly has a very long tail out to the high end and probably bunched up above the various minimum wage levels at the lower end. Not sure what other lumps there might be deviating from a log-normal.


But a whole bunch of people make 140-200k. Two working professionals in an urban area + some investment income or a consulting job will get you there.


That's two people... so one earns $100 and the other $50 no probs with that....

David
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext