Who are the rich? Who are the poor?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JHC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JHC

Guest
According to the calculator on givingwhatwecan.org:

If my wife and I live in the USA with a combined $20,000 income, we would still be in richest 14.1% of the world’s population

A combined income of $10,000 a year would still be the richest 23.6% of the world’s population.

So how do you not be rich living in the USA with any sort of income?

Thank you
 
“Rich” is relative, and isn’t measured solely by income. One has to take into account one’s responsibilities. Children or grandchildren who will require education, one’s present giving plan, one’s obligations in the form of debts or business requirements or providing for disaster or even old age.

One can be hugely wealthy in terms of assets, like Warren Buffett, and yet minimize his taxable income to less than his secretary’s salary.
 
JHC said:
According to the calculator on givingwhatwecan.org:

If my wife and I live in the USA with a combined $20,000 income, we would still be in richest 14.1% of the world’s population

A combined income of $10,000 a year would still be the richest 23.6% of the world’s population.

So how do you not be rich living in the USA with any sort of income?

Thank you
Click to expand...
Attachment/detachment are what make a person Gospel rich or Gospel poor.
 
**The Deepest Poverty
**
Code: 
 The deepest poverty is not material poverty but spiritual poverty: the inability to be joyful, the conviction that life is absurd and contradictory. In different forms the poverty is widespread today, both in the materially rich and in the impoverished nations.
  • **Pope Benedict XVI **
 
I would start with asking: who are the middle class?

The middle class is ANYONE who has to work for a living … anyone who has to account for their time. The amount of money they have or the amount of money they make is irrelevant.

If you have to show up or if you have to fill out a time sheet, then you are middle class. If you are a manager, then you are middle class. If you are an executive and fly around in a Learjet, you qualify as middle class. [Because a Learjet is cramped and you cannot stand up straight.] By definition, since a lawyer, for example, has to fill out a time sheet and bill clients for their time, then they are middle class. And if you lose your job and the paychecks stop … and that changes your income, then you are middle class.

If you fly around in your own converted airliner, then you are rich. You have lobbyists who can change tax laws. You own factories; not as a shareholder, but as the owner. You do not have to account to anyone for your time. You do not have suitcases when you travel, because you have houses in all the places where you travel to.

If you get government assistance, then you are poor.

And if you do not have a roof over your head, then you are the poorest of the poor. If you do not know where your next meal is coming from, then you are the poorest of the poor. If your “home” is made of cardboard boxes, then you are the poorest of the poor.
 
Ridgerunner said:
“Rich” is relative, and isn’t measured solely by income. One has to take into account one’s responsibilities. Children or grandchildren who will require education, one’s present giving plan, one’s obligations in the form of debts or business requirements or providing for disaster or even old age.

One can be hugely wealthy in terms of assets, like Warren Buffett, and yet minimize his taxable income to less than his secretary’s salary.
Click to expand...
Is someone poorer because they make up responsibilities for themselves? If the local public schools are sound, does one have a responsibility to provide for private schools? That might be nice, but one can hardly call it an obligation. Similarly, is one obligated to provide higher education to their children and grandchildren, particularly when children and grandchildren can provide it themselves? Not that there is anything wrong with those things, but it is because one is rich that one can provide those things.
 
Monte_RCMS said:
I would start with asking: who are the middle class?

The middle class is ANYONE who has to work for a living … anyone who has to account for their time. The amount of money they have or the amount of money they make is irrelevant.

If you have to show up or if you have to fill out a time sheet, then you are middle class. If you are a manager, then you are middle class. If you are an executive and fly around in a Learjet, you qualify as middle class. [Because a Learjet is cramped and you cannot stand up straight.] By definition, since a lawyer, for example, has to fill out a time sheet and bill clients for their time, then they are middle class. And if you lose your job and the paychecks stop … and that changes your income, then you are middle class.

If you fly around in your own converted airliner, then you are rich. You have lobbyists who can change tax laws. You own factories; not as a shareholder, but as the owner. You do not have to account to anyone for your time. You do not have suitcases when you travel, because you have houses in all the places where you travel to.

If you get government assistance, then you are poor.

And if you do not have a roof over your head, then you are the poorest of the poor. If you do not know where your next meal is coming from, then you are the poorest of the poor. If your “home” is made of cardboard boxes, then you are the poorest of the poor.
Click to expand...
I know people who are worth a couple of million and they still get government assistance, are they poor?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I know people who are worth a couple of million and they still get government assistance, are they poor?
Click to expand...
And I know people who work very hard, at more than one job, and still can’t cover the basics to live.
 
Monte_RCMS said:
I would start with asking: who are the middle class?

The middle class is ANYONE who has to work for a living … anyone who has to account for their time. The amount of money they have or the amount of money they make is irrelevant.

If you have to show up or if you have to fill out a time sheet, then you are middle class. If you are a manager, then you are middle class. If you are an executive and fly around in a Learjet, you qualify as middle class. [Because a Learjet is cramped and you cannot stand up straight.] By definition, since a lawyer, for example, has to fill out a time sheet and bill clients for their time, then they are middle class. And if you lose your job and the paychecks stop … and that changes your income, then you are middle class.
Click to expand...
That’s not how middle class is defined–in any of the definitions that I have seen.

The peace of Christ,
Mark
 
MarkInOregon said:
That’s not how middle class is defined–in any of the definitions that I have seen.

The peace of Christ,
Mark
Click to expand...
One of the problems with the concept of middle class is that there is no real agreed upon definition of middle class. There are many people in the top 10% of the income distribution in the US who would call them selves middle class, even though their income is nowhere near the middle.
 
But in reality you have: destitute, poor, working class, lower middle class, middle middle class, upper middle class and way off the charts wealthy…
 
JHC said:
A combined income of $10,000 a year would still be the richest 23.6% of the world’s population.

So how do you not be rich living in the USA with any sort of income?

Thank you
Click to expand...
If you can afford to live indoors in the USA, then you are rich. So I presume that most people in the world live outdoors, because they cannot afford to live inside any kind of shelter. However, that seems implausible.

Apparently, the numbers are misleading.
 
One thing is to avoid judging people.

There is the threat of envy.

Even among the poorest of the poor, there is a phenomenon in which someone with less is always pulling down someone who has slightly more.
 
Monte_RCMS said:
One thing is to avoid judging people.

There is the threat of envy.

Even among the poorest of the poor, there is a phenomenon in which someone with less is always pulling down someone who has slightly more.
Click to expand...
Right. That is the attachment that we struggle to let go of.
 
The thing is though, none of us know Gods ‘definition’ of rich and poor, in the modern day US, $20K a year is considered poor, but on a global scale, closer to rich, but according to God? Who knows?

Also, who is it that is helping to form our definitions of ‘rich and poor’…the secular world, gee, now why would they ever want to cloud the definitions of these? LOL
 
stinkcat_14 said:
Is someone poorer because they make up responsibilities for themselves? If the local public schools are sound, does one have a responsibility to provide for private schools? That might be nice, but one can hardly call it an obligation. Similarly, is one obligated to provide higher education to their children and grandchildren, particularly when children and grandchildren can provide it themselves? Not that there is anything wrong with those things, but it is because one is rich that one can provide those things.
Click to expand...
One doesn’t have to be rich to provide those things. One only has to have reasonable means and a lot of determination. Anymore, it’s difficult for young people to pay for their own educations without taking out loans that may impoverish or even bankrupt them in the future.

Back when I attended college, it was entirely possible, even at minimum wage, to earn enough during the summer to pay for one’s room and board in the next two semesters. That’s not possible anymore. Tuition at the nearest state university was free. A kid could work some during school and pay for books, etc. So, of course a kid could put himself through. Now the nearest university (MSU) does charge tuition, though it’s one of the lowest in the country, and nobody can earn enough during the summer to pay for room and board. And then there are very expensive texts.
 
mikekle said:
The thing is though, none of us know Gods ‘definition’ of rich and poor, in the modern day US, $20K a year is considered poor, but on a global scale, closer to rich, but according to God? Who knows?

Also, who is it that is helping to form our definitions of ‘rich and poor’…the secular world, gee, now why would they ever want to cloud the definitions of these? LOL
Click to expand...
Over the centuries, the Church and her Saints have done well, IMO - in drawing interpretation of God’s meanings of rich and poor, in the context they were used. Many times in Scriptural usage; Rich=completely content with material wealth. Poor=content with trusting God for eternal life. It’s more an orientation than a tax bracket.

To define rich and poor in the political world is far more subjective.
 
You can’t make comparisons just based on income. Cost of living has to be considered too. Different places require different amounts of income to afford the basic necessities. I think anyone that can pay for all their own needs without help from family or government is rich as far as income. That’s comfortable living. In America, that might mean $30,000 in one place but $50,000 somewhere else. In poor countries, it might only be $10,000. Keep in mind jobs in poor countries also pay poor. Average salary might only be $3,000. Then it’s easy to see how $10,000 is rich.
 
Jared2914 said:
I think anyone that can pay for all their own needs without help from family or government is rich as far as income.
Click to expand...
What if you have savings, but no income? You will be able to pay for all of your own needs for a certain amount of time, but it’s difficult to see how you can be classified as “rich as far as income” if you have no income.

Also, governments provide some physical security, such as via law enforcement. Is physical security not a need?

The conclusion “is rich as far as income” suggests that the word “help” in the phrase “without help from family or government” refers to receiving money, but if you are talking about money, then why use the word “help”? It would be clearer to say “without receiving money from family or government.”
 
Most people will tell you that a person is “rich” if that person has more money than they do. 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top