[OC] Millionaires across the world
By - JoeFalchetto
Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/JoeFalchetto!
**Here is some important information about this post:**
* [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/jc76cn/oc_millionaires_across_the_world/g8zlb75/)
* [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"JoeFalchetto"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on)
Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked.
[Join the Discord Community](https://discord.gg/NRnrWE7)
Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation.
^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)
Monaco should have its own color. Isn’t it a *requirement* to be a millionaire to live there?
Not to live there but to move there yes, kinda.
First requirement would be a job offer in Monaco. If you don't have that, looks like all you need is 500k in cash on your Monaco bank account then bank handles all the rest.
TIL. That's hilarious if true, but makes sense if you have super limited real estate in a desirable living area.
Have you ever been in Monaco? It is not nice at all. The reason why it is desirable is that there are no taxes and everyone is rich. But housing sucks, parking sucks and there is very little in terms of nature.
I've always assumed that most of the rich people in Monaco just lived in yachts.
I've assumed they "live" there and spend their time in their tax-heavy neighbors (esp. the UK, Italy, and France)
The UK isn't exactly a "neighbour" of Monaco though.
I live in Nice, a lot of people who live in Monaco rely on services from here and the surrounding areas.
It is Nicer than Monaco?
It's the Nicest place in the world.
Yeah, but no matter how Nice the kids are there, German kids will always be kinder.
I know you're all making jokes, but ive been to many cities around the world and nice is close to #1
The whole history of the South of France, the Riviera, and the Cote d'Azur as the getaway for the rich and famous goes back to post-Napoleonic English tourists. Queen Victoria regularly wintered in Nice. I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination that there are plenty of ex-Britons domiciled in ~~Nice~~ Monaco.
Oh, there are plenty of Brits here, I live in a neighbourhood in which I'd say maybe 1 out of 15 residents is a British retiree. Our family has always had many British acquaintances.
There are many other areas here in which Brits are found in large numbers.
And yeah, there are Monaco residents who spend some time in Britain every year, especially the Brits I guess! I was speaking more in general terms, for most Monaco residents most of the time Nice and PACA in general are the areas in which they'll find what they need that Monaco doesn't provide.
The street that runs along the seaside in Nice is called "Promenade des Anglais", a walkway that was funded by the English (the Anglican church). (Things I learn watching le tour)
It is a place where you can walk everywhere.
(but yeah tough luck if you are late for a meeting, its happened to me)
But still thats a little disingenuous, Monaco is a zip code to have, you aren't stuck there. It is adjacent to french towns on all sides. You can trip and fall into the next town as if nothing happened with the exact same building styles and activities occurring. It is a completely porous border into a town that *happens* to have unique levels of sovereignty, with a lot of history to back it up. But it is very easy not to notice.
Yes, lots of tiny apartments and basically no mansions. If you want it you can figure it out.
I know this isn’t what you mean exactly, but I walked the coast from Antibes to Ventimiglia, Monaco was the only bit where I couldn’t find a way to walk through next to the coast.
There is very little nature in Monaco itself... but the Southern French Alps are one of the most beautiful places on Earth and can be reached by car in ~10 minutes.
Of all the complaints I'd have living in Monaco, natural beauty definitely wouldn't make the list.
Right? What a weird comment. As if you couldn’t physically leave the boundaries of Monaco if you lived there. Also, housing doesn’t suck if you have a €10M pad overlooking the Mediterranean, walking distance from your yacht. And parking? Do we really think the average person who can afford to live in Monaco relies on driving themselves and parking their own car everywhere they go?
The reason Monaco sucks is the same reason Manhattan sucks, which is the same reason anywhere could suck: because you’re too poor to afford living there the way it’s meant to be lived. If you’re rich, though, you’re not moving there just because of the lack of taxes. You’re moving there because it’s pretty as fuck and you can mingle with other UHNWIs. If taxes were the only reason people went to Monaco, there are much cheaper alternatives all over the world.
You mean a country that is smaller than a square mile doesn't have a national park?
I mean, it is a tiny country, people don’t expect much in the way of nature there
Yeah and it's not like the borders are closed. 1 hour drive and you're in the Mercantour National Park, which has lovely nature. Idk what this guy is on about
thats what helicopters are for.
Monaco is nice as fuck. It looks amazing, it's clean as shit and the McDonald's is godly
I mean you have France and Italy nearby. Mountains and beaches are close.
I figured it's basically a tourist area with beach houses, which exist elsewhere. If they want to see nature, they can go to France. It's not like they're locked in.
Why in cash? That's a hell lot of money to carry around in cash!
Something tells me that you don't have to carry $500k around.
You do actually, police officers will routinely check if you have 500k on yourself at all time. this isn't required for tourists but resident have to.
Residents that fail to produce evidence will be thrown into the harbor their feet strapped to a solid bloc of gold. It's true.
and if caught, oddly enough, the fine is 500k
"Don't have $500k cash? straight to [the harbor] jail! [Monaco] has the best millionaires, because of [harbor] jail."
And if you have too much money? Believe it or not; right to jail.
Overcook chilean sea bass...jail
Undercook the fine Monacan lamb chops...also jail
Overcook/undercook still jail.
Just booked a diving charter to Monaco harbor. Have fun being broke, suckers!
They retrieve the gold, but leave the filthy poors down there for the fish.
Yeah, but some stinking French pig-fish will come by and think it's some sort of delicacy.
Can confirm. I parked my rental car on the street in Monaco and didn't have the proper amount of cash with me, so before I could even get out of the car, a car came by and clipped my sideview mirror.
The upside is that it's the first time I got to fill out a police report in french.
I think they mean you have to have 500k cash available, not credit or tied up in something else like property.
Yeah no idea why I wrote in cash
You can refer to money in your bank account as cash to differentiate it from stocks, bonds, futures derivatives and other assets.
Cash = liquid assets. You can't have $500k in stocks and bonds - it has to be readily available money.
Cash = deposits. Liquid assets include marketable securities such as stocks and bonds. Your sentiment is right, just want to clarify on the terminology.
I mean somebody has to sweep the streets right?
I feel like most of those people live in France.
And those people do not live in monaco.
I'm honestly surprised it's not higher than that
Millionaires have kids that don’t have assets in their name yet maybe?
So at the low end, for every 20 Americans, one is a millionaire?
That so wild
I mean if being a millionaire is literally owning $1M, then most middle-class people who have consistently contributed to their 401k and are over 50 years old would probably be a millionaires, so 1 in 8 doesn’t seem that far off.
If its total assets, including house and life insurance, that makes even more sense
It would be total assets and cash minus debt tho so if you had a mortgage that would be taken out
I also wonder if other countries have pensions rather than 401k and if those don't count.
Difficult to compare, certainly. In Germany a large part of your pension comes from "the government" based on how much your earned before, but having the guarantee to get that pension isn't part of your net worth.
Ok, the comment above you had me feeling sad—because I’m not a millionaire—then yours made me happy again.
My parents are millionaires but it definitely doesnt feel like it
Because a million dollars only goes so far for 2 people across 20 years of retirement
This. If you're a middle class or upper middle class person, or couple, and you've spent your working life saving steadily a good 15 to 20% for retirement (and many do much more than that), and investing it wisely in a diversified aggressive portfolio of equities in tax-advantaged retirement accounts, then by the time you're into your late middle ages you'd likely be a millionaire fairly easily. This rate doesn't seem surprising to me at all.
It doesn't even have to be 15-20% of a middle or upper middle income. The [median American household](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N), saving 7% a year will retire a net-worth millionaire. That's $5k/year averaging a 7% return net inflation over 40 years, if you want to [check the math.](https://www.calculator.net/investment-calculator.html?ctype=endamount&ctargetamountv=1000000&cstartingprinciplev=0&cyearsv=40&cinterestratev=7&ccontributeamountv=5000&ciadditionat1=annually&printit=0&x=97&y=26)
And that's with no tax advantages like a 401k or IRA would give you! And no employer match, no pension, no social security, no home equity or any other windfalls of any kind.
The best part is that it’s only 200k of contributions over that span of time and 800k of interest.
When they say millionaire, its your total assets, not like you have a liquid 1mill just chillin in your checking account...
Yeah, with inflation and such, being a millionaire doesn't mean what people think of when they think millionaire.
The average millionaire isn't jetting around between LA and Aspen, they're a 60 year old with K-mart jeans, a 5 year old Honda, a decent retirement account, and some home equity.
Granted they ARE doing much better than the average but they aren't using gold toilets.
This is correct. I'm 45, and I've had a 401k for 20+ years that I contribute to little by little. My wife and I were able to buy a small house a few years ago. She's a teacher, I work in publishing, and neither of us really makes a great living (and we live in a high cost of living area, in order to take care of her parents). We live paycheck to paycheck, and we don't really buy much nice stuff, but our net worth (house + 401k) should be more than a million when we're in our 60s. "Millionaire" sounds glamorous, but it's really not. It's a lot of cutting costs and living frugally and collecting small bits of money over many years.
Please understand, though---I'm not complaining, in any way *at. all.* We're lucky that we can lead pretty simple lives and end up with that net worth down the line, and **our experience used to be more normal, but Millennials (and tail-end Gen Xers) got \*screwed\* by the Boomers.** They just did. I know there may be a bunch of Boomers who comment and say "It wasn't me! I'm screwed too!" but it's just the truth. Home ownership used to be much more attainable, and it's just simply not now---for dozens of reasons, from college debt to health care to an absurdly low minimum wage to low skilled wages to etc etc etc. You've heard it all before, but it's really true. If we re-visit this map years from now, it might look a lot different for the U.S.
Boomer here. This seems correct to me. Partly, lots of no-birth-control fucking -- California had 15M people when I was born, the world 5 thousand million fewer people than now. Partly we were massively subsidized, e.g., GI Bill housing for my parents, my fees (total) per quarter at U California were $35, &c. People who are heavily subsidized, maybe even if they don't know it, become conservative, and so we had the huge shift to the right in the US, which made it worse (same services [for me], lower taxes!) We may not have consciously meant to, but we screwed you guys.
This is a great comment, and thank you for providing specifics. "Massively subsidized"---this, to almost every detail, describes my parents, who are now very conservative and against many of the policies they benefit from. Thank you, Fox News!
I'm a Gen Xer, but I think we're a lot to blame, too---a lot of us "got while the getting was good," right before college costs skyrocketed and job benefits disappeared. I've worked for the same company for 20 years, and I actually have a pension---I told that to one of my younger Millennial cousins, and the concept absolutely mystified him. "You mean... they're going to pay you---AFTER you've retired?" He couldn't get his head around a corporation doing such a thing.
I think it'll be up the Millennials to fix things for themselves, sadly. That *really* sucks, and it's not fair, but I think they're up to the task. Gonna take a while, though.
Ps--Love your username! I should probably change mine to something similar!
I believe it's actually one in eight.
Just have to own a home in a desirable city pretty much. I'd wager thats responsible for the vast majority of millionaires in the US.
Yeah I have friends who bought a house in Seattle for $450k at 25 and now 5 years later it’s worth almost $900k.
$450k in appreciation and $50k in principle paid. Nice way to make half a million right there!
It’s actually pretty easy to become a millionaire in America, especially at the end of someone’s career.
Most employers match employee 401k contributions. It’s a snowball effect that adds up over time. Average 401k accounts can reach 2 million at the end of a career with as little as 12% 401k contribution per paycheck (obviously depends greatly on salary, 12% of 120k/yr will get you close).
Good ole North Korea. Never any data. Quite reliable.
1200 millionnaires per 1000 people!
That number is insultingly low for our supreme leader.
When Kim il sung was birthed from the angels on top of mount paektu he bequeathed everyone in the land a stimulus check for 1 million dollars.
I want my dictator check 😕
how come chile has so many millionaires?
Well, they are the richest country in south america. Not far from say Greece in wealth, and they are in the same category on the map.
Chile is at the development level of Portugal. With maybe the exception of a larger inequality, so it has a larger share of rich people and a larger share of poor people instead of a large middle class (As is usual in the Americas).
That's also the reason of the recent protests, despite it being a country that's done most things well and could be considered the first case of a developed Latin American nation that is not a tax heaven (like Panama) and having reduced poverty from like 40% to 8% in a few decades.
It's crazy seeing how one city has such extreme conditions for the wealthy and the poor. Las Condes looks like it's another fucking country. Sometimes I look for pictures of the wealthiest places on Chile, see a store you would find on Europe or the US and find myself saying "I didn't even know they had this store here"
I can confirm this, got to stay there a bit. If not for the private security and barbed wire everywhere you'd assume it was another wealthy neighborhood on a hill. Audis, BMWs, some old classics if you're lucky. It helps you can't have a car older than, what, 10 years?
>Not far from say Greece in wealth,
So they're piss poor then?
Private wealth is decent in Greece, it’s earnings that suck.
Greece is still an industrialized developed country, just with an indebted government and some economic trouble.
You mean... Chilionaires?
This fuckin guy
That's my new rap name.
It’s a pretty rich country look at the stats and you’ll be surprised.
People mention copper but most of the copper industry is either state-owned or foreign-owned, there's only one Chilean economic group in the industry, the Luksic group (which is the richest group in the country, worth 14 billion dollars).
The correct answer is that in the 80s, during Pinochet's dictatorship, there were privatizations and free market reforms that let the economy grow a lot during the 90s and 2000s (today not so much), but that at the same time led to the creation of a millionaire (or even billionaire) class that basically owns all of Chile's economy. These guys were friends or political adepts of Pinochet so they benefited a lot from it, and the companies were able to grow because they have access to cheap money from the pension funds, which invest a lot in national companies.
So we have the paradox of a country that grew a lot with an unprecedented reduction of poverty and improvements in the living conditions, but that at the same became very unequal with most wealth captured by these economic groups.
- less people than other countries
- geography isolated from the rest of South America
- free market stuff after Pinochet government
Coopers a good guy, very generous
builds great barrels
A real barrel of fun
It's cause they're pretty chill about it
Tons of free market 😬
When you value **individual liberties and promote free-market ideals,** while your neighbours are driving away their high achievers towards your country, you are bound to get prosperous.
How about a billionaires map?
How about a map of the inside of their homes
The world: "What do you have there?"
Switzerland, with millionaires from all over the world using her as tax haven: "A smoothie"
Edit: Now that I realize, cheese, chocolate or a watch with be more fitting and funny, so feel free to use whatever
It's true. I am from Greece and we have a lot more millionaires. They simply keep it all in Switzerland and other tax havens to avoid taxation.
The Swiss bank account loopholes thing hasn't been around for years.
Caymans really took Switzerland's place in the banking world. I believe there's another country in the caribbean as well.
There are a bunch of small tax haven countries/islands. Check out The Panama Papers sometime...
Hey, remember when the Panama Papers came out and revealed a massive global tax dodging scheme and then, like, absolutely nothing happened and nobody faced any consequences and everyone forgot?
Actually, a lot of things have happened around the world thanks to the Panama papers, including recovering more than 1.2 Billion dollars for various countries. You probably haven't heard a lot about it because relatively few Americans were involved, as you can already create shell companies in the United States - in multiple different states even.
You can find some more information here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_Panama_Papers
Theoretically you could create a shell company for every state in the Union, so that it looks like you operate 50 separate business units.
Fake news! The reporter who covered the story definitely faced consequences. They died in a car-bombing...
[**She** died in a car bombing.](https://www.npr.org/2018/07/22/630866527/mastermind-behind-malta-journalist-killing-remains-a-mystery)
It was tax dodging - not tax evasion. Totally legal, albeit arguably shady.
Now - should loopholes be plugged? Probably. But I don't really blame them for using said loopholes. I know that I try to minimize my taxes too, though I'm in a lower bracket. And some of those "loopholes" are intentional - like real estate deductions out the wazoo.
Ex: Trump's an ass, but no one who knows investments/taxes was actually surprised that his taxes were so low because he's primarily a real estate investor. All of the deductions are intentional to encourage people to invest in real estate within the US, and has been since the 50s, with the idea that real estate is one of the major engines of economic growth. Plus, if he ever does sell his real estate, his cost basis will be very low.
Is there an argument to remove them? Sure.
Ah yes. Panama was the other country I had in mind actually.
Panama handles a lot of financial frauds now. Also flag of convenience ship registries. Pretty much any sort of semi-legal evasion type stuff.
>Now that I realize, cheese, chocolate or a watch with be more fitting and funny, so feel free to use whatever
If you did, people would have missed the iCarly reference
This is also why Luxembourg is notably in the "No Data" club.
My God, an iCarly reference in 2020.
I love it.
This has been a very common meme for the past months.
Australia has more millionaires than India, but India has more people with over $50M in wealth. Shows income disparity!!
(From the source data)
It's actually mostly a program called superannuation, where all wages have to pay around 10% to a retirement fund no one can touch till they hit retirement age (until our GOP looted in earlier this year). But also housing prices going into a massive bubble.
Together push pretty much anyone who owns a house without a mortgage in the major cities into millionaire bracket.
This also put Australia at the 2nd for median net worth at 180k only below switzerland at 190k with USA 3rd at 160k for reference.
Australia historically does very well in networth for average people.
Edit data from googling median networth by country and what googled scraped for me. From https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-wealth-per-capita/
I went off https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-wealth-per-capita/ for reference.
Where did you get that data from?
Forced retirement savings will go a long way towards achieving that goal!
Not exactly sure why, but after seeing this map, I decided to Google a global map of [kidnapping likelihood](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cyf_Hw-XAAAB1ls?format=jpg&name=large).
Not quite as much overlap as I expected.
I like that they colored in the Falkland Islands.
"Bob's been kidnapped!"
"We know. We're on a small island with no trees. It was Steve. They're both right over there together. STEVE, CUT THAT SHIT OUT RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE BEING SO SUS!"
“Steve, state your demands.“
“I want my bar tab reset by 5 PM, or I’ll make Bob at least 20 minutes late for dinner.”
"Cut your shit before the Royal Navy shows up again"
all those famous Swiss kidnappings...
I think that it makes a lot of sense, generally the countries that have a lot of millionaires have a blooming economy so its easier to make a "decent" living instead of having to depend on criminal stuff, A really good example of this is Chile in South America (if you compare both maps)
NZ is probably just because of house prices making any Auckland homeowner a millionaire by default.
"Oh this rundown shithole I bought in the 90s for $150k? Yeah it's worth $1.5m"
It's the same with other countries too.
Most "millionaire's" here are really just home owners.
Kiwi dollar is quite a lot weaker than the US dollar though, so most Auckland houses do not mean automatic millionaire in USD
I mean that doesn't really diminish anything. If you own your home free and clear and can sell it for $1.5m, you're a millionaire.
1 in 20 to 1 in 10 (presumably adult) Americans are millionaires? Even 1 in 40 to 1 in 20 for Canada, Western Europe and Australia is surprising. Is it mainly old people who've paid off their house and are in/near retirement?
Yes it’s mostly older people who are at/near retirement. In the US if you're upper middle class it’s not too difficult to have a net worth of a million later in life. The other thing to remember is when the mystique of the millionaire first started a million dollars was far more valuable. A million US dollars in 1970 is over 6 today, whereas 150k in 1970 is around a million today.
Agreed. Decamillionaire should be the new standard for rich
Yep, I've been thinking of this for a while now.
I just interviewed for a job this week where my compensation should be around $100k
Thats a decent amount of money, but I feel 6-figures just isn't what it used to be... and that of course inflation means it isn’t
In big metropolitan areas like NY, Boston, san fran, 100k doesn't go too far. But in lots of places 100k would make you very comfortable. Our first house was $115k (it was a bit of a fixer upper) 5 years ago and we just moved and our new home was $220k. Around here $200-300k can get you a nice house.
Highly likely. Becoming a millionaire isn't actually that hard. With a moderate income, good financial practices, and time, a million dollars can be achieved.
For example, a 25 year old can go to their bank, open up a tax shielded account (traditional or Roth IRA in the US, TFSA or RRSP in Canada), and set up a high growth investment portfolio. Contribute just $500 a month until you're 65 and you'll most likely have your million, or more, depending on average rates of return.
Yeah, work at ~$22K/yr from 18 yrs to 65 yrs and that's a million right there. Of course, you don't keep it all, but most people earn more than ~$22K (median income is $68K) and most people own a home.
Saving $22K/yr from a median income of $68K would imply a fairly high savings rate (>30%), and this assuming $68K is post-tax.
I don't imagine I'd want to hang out with the type of dude who has $1M+ and decides to stay in Syria.
I don't see any indication on how this is calculated. Is it net (assets - debts) or just all assets ? Owning a 1M€ flat in Paris with a 700K€ mortgage doesn't make you a true millionaire.
I don’t know for sure but I would bet it’s net wealth. That would be ridiculous if it just counted asset value without subtracting debt.
I guessing French Guiana sticking out in South America is more a map thing (ie calling it France) than it is actual millionaires in that part of the world
Yeah people focused on Chile and I'm like wtf is up with FG?
Right. I mean FG just IS France. It isn't a country. It is part of France.
I mean if you have $1m in assets so like a paid of $300k home and $700k in a retirement account you are technically a millionaire. Everyday people can be a millionaire one day through investing in a decent retirement account, as is why the US is so high
Wouldn't a million dollars still be considered middle class in America. If you own a home and have a retirement account, you're probably already there.
Yep, tons of middle class 50 year olds have half a home mortgage paid off and hundreds of thousands in their 401ks...
Inflation has really punished the branding of being a "millionaire"
You’re greatly over estimating home prices in US. If you’re retiring and outright own your house you’re probably right, but majority of Americans can own a home and still not be a millionaire even when wealth is considered
Does that mean there is between 5% and 10% of people who are millionaires in the USA and Switzerland?? That doesn't seem right...
Depending on how they calculate it, 1 million isn’t really a difficult to achieve here. Some places it does t even get you far.
Especially when a majority of that "wealth" is tied up in your primary residence. Anyone with a mostly paid off home in a highly desirable City or surrounding urban area are "millionaires".
My in-laws bought a house in Southern California in the 1970s. Since then, the home values have skyrocketed.
Due to home equity, they're technically millionaires.
My fiancee and I bought our townhouse in November of last year for 600k, did some reno's and thanks to pandemic and low interest rates, it's now valued at 800k (comparable units sold in last few months). And the people we bought off of paid 400k, only 4 years before they sold it to us. It's crazy to think about. This is Toronto area though, which is definitely one of the most volatile markets in NA/the world.
Toronto "area." Which implies Mississauga or Pickering or Markham or something, right? In Toronto itself, you can't get anything for 600k.
I doubt it, but if OP converted to USD — the yeah you could get something solid in Toronto proper for U$600k ~~ C$793k
Edit: who the fuck am I kidding 800k doesn’t get you shit in this city anymore.
Yeah but the full asset value isn’t yours until it’s paid off.
I didn't mean to insinuate we have 800k in net worth, but rather "seemingly" gained 200k over this period of time. In my original comment I referenced "mostly paid off home" as most people probably had 250k mortgages from 20 years ago that are almost paid off on homes now worth north of 1 Mill.
I bought a condo in Northern Arizona in 2017 (paid in cash) and moved out in less than a year. I kept it and now rent it out. According to the county, its present value is 30% more than what I paid for it.
Makes me wish I bought more than one.
LOL. I was thinking Toronto before I read that part of your post.
It's not a technicality. Your net worth is your assets minus your liabilities. If they own a house that's worth over a million, and don't have debt, they are millionaires.
Yeah why is wealth in quotations as if equity in a home is not real or something? If you have a stock worth $400,000 and you sell it you have $400,000. If you have a house worth $400,000, owe nothing on it, and you sell it you have $400,000.
If you bought a home in Toronto 25 years ago for anything near 300,000 (which would be a small townhouse at the time) today you're a multi-millionaire.
I don’t see why millionaires is in quotes. They either paid a million for their homes or their real estate investment is now worth $1M+. They might not have comparable income, but a $1M property is nothing to shake a stick at.
If that is the way it's calculated, wouldn't you have a similar phenomenon in western Europe in high value markets?
It doesn't seem to be stated in the data, but you would have to assume so when looking at 5-10% of the US pop being millionaires, and 2.5-5% of Canadians. Even people with net worth north of 10million rarely have income or liquid cash sitting around in excess of 1 Million dollars, it doesn't make sense too with the way inflation works.
Man that's depressing.
Yeah if you consider a millionaire in assets, anyone who owns a house in Hong Kong, Melbourne, Vancouver, Toronto ect is a millionaire.
For some perspective, 15% of the US population is over 65. The average net worth of people in that age range is a bit over a million. It seems that the 5% to 10% figure is fairly reasonable.
Yep. The dude sitting in the cubicle next to me was just telling me how he was all excited he just crossed the million dollar mark. Super regular dude nearing in on retirement.
Consider houses and retirement funds.
If someone has been upper middle class and is on the verge of retirement, there's a good chance they are actually a millionaire. If someone is working for a big tech company and isn't an idiot with their money, they will become a millionaire. If someone is making a decent salary (Say 60k) in a low cost of living area and lives frugally, they will retire a millionaire.
A small apartment in San Fransisco is close to $1million. If you outright own a home in SF, you're a millionaire.
There arent going to be nearly as many young people with that sort of wealth, but $1 million net worth is just wealthy today. It's not filthy rich.
There are a lot of 55-65 year old people with a substantial nest egg. Don't discount what a lifetime of investments makes!
I make... Slightly more than minimum wage in Geneva (Live in the US in an above average COL area) and getting to $1M for retirement seems quite achievable for me alone, and with my girlfriend seems to be very likely.
Despite Reddit's economic beliefs becoming a millionaire in the US is a fairly well understood and trivial process.
You sound like someone with misconceptions about millionaires. You should read The Millionaire Next Door by Thomas Stanley. You'd probably find a lot of the data shocking.
Yes. Including home equity 12% of American households have a net worth over a million dollars (you might have to type 1000000 in the the link below):
As others have said, much of this cohort are 65 and older and this represents their home and retirement savings. Sorting by age indicates at least 10% of the population over 45 have a net worth of $1MM and above and 20% in the 65-60 group have $1MM and above. More details sorted by age:
These statistics are based on the Federal Survey of Consumer Finance published every three years (most recently in 2020).
If they include assets like your retirement account/property, it seems quite reasonable. Retiring with $1million saved up is not uncommon if you have a middle class to upper-middle class (not rich) salary.
This. Huge difference between having $1M+ in a checking account vs net worth.
Heck, the plan for how our people live in their old age is to be at least a millionaire be the time you retire!
If you start saving in your early 20s (~$16/day, see my child comment) you'll usually have a net worth of over 1m by your 40s.
>Edit: by saving I implied investing, since holding cash is dangerous due to inflation.
Just a question.. but isn't it good to have more millionaires? That means the wealth is more spread out and id rather have more millionaires than billionaires
Thank you. The fact that some people see the U.S. on here and think it's a bad thing is hilarious
Hong Kong when you spill a little bit of Capitalism on it:
Billionaires would be extremely skewed because of inequality and how relatively little there are of them on the planet. For example Russia is 18th in the world by total wealth, but 3rd by people with over 500 million dollar net worth. Brazil is 16th and 6th respectively. There are many more examples like this
Cool Data, thanks for sharing! Would be nice to see a bit further breakdown. 51-102 in the highest bracket is a bit broad.
My parents are not wealthy, nor rich, nor upper middle class, nor middle middle class. They are retiring this month. They had me go over their finances. To my surprise, they are millionaires. But get this. They can barely retire. Most of their wealth is tied up in the house and they don’t want to move. They are retiring at 60, so they don’t have Medicaid or Social security, and have to pay for health insurance. They want to just live on the interest of their 401ks till the benefits kick in. I advised them to take out $2k a month to live on. And they were like, cool, we can do that. I’m over here barely making ends meet on $5k a month.