I just came across this article entitled :
Wal-Mart Heiress’s Art Museum a Moral Blight: Jeffrey Goldberg.
In the article Jeffrey Goldberg says:
“In 2007, according to the labor economist Sylvia Allegretto, the six Walton family members on the Forbes 400 had a net worth equal to the bottom 30 percent of all Americans. The Waltons are now collectively worth about $93 billion, according to Forbes.”
There are a few ways you can take that information but lets put a little light on it.
So the six Waltons are worth $93 billion collectively.
Total US household wealth is between $50 trillion and $70 trillion.
In 2009 about 1 in 4 American households had a zero or negative net worth. This information is taken from The Great Recession exacerbated existing wealth disparities in the U.S.
So looking at that I currently hold more wealth than the bottom 25% of all Americans combined. That sounds cool to say but the reality of it is that anyone with assets worth more than their debt is in the same boat as me here.
So my daughter here is holding more wealth than the bottom 25% of all Americans combined with the money she just got from the tooth fairy last night. I can assure you she has no debt and she has at least ten times more than this sitting in piggy bank on her dresser.
Makes you think a bit. Your wealth is not determined by how much money you make but by how much money you have and hold onto.
How many of you are wealthier than 25% of all Americans? If not what was the biggest contributing factor to give you a negative or zero net worth?
Awww, what a cute photo! And that’s a super-catchy title for your post.
It goes to show that “relative” wealth certainly doesn’t imply “absolute” wealth!
Thanks. It helps that my wife is a photographer.
This is kind of sad. How could so many people have so little money?
CUTE!!!
It is kind of sad to see so many people in debt. I guess we do have more money than the bottom 25% combined. It sounds good, but it’s just a really sad state of affair.
So true, our society has learned to live off debt. People can have a very rich appearance and still have an incredible negative net worth.
25%? Yikes. To me both income and wealth are important, as you can’t have one without the other, though clearly you can be irresponsible with both, too.
You’re right to point out the semi-ironic implication of your daughter’s networth compared to the combined wealth of those in the lower 25% bracket. Two things I gather from it: 1) the disparity between rich and poor is…significant to the say the least; 2) the formula itself for networth is suspicious in that the inclusion of the owned assets within the calculation can sometimes mask one’s financial reality (for instance, as you point out, anyone with assets worth more than their debt might appear “well off” in terms of networth even if its the case that their disposable income (for instance) is consistent with people within the lower economic tier.