Data sources used: UBS Global Wealth Report, World Inequality Database, Forbes World’s Billionaires List, Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances.
Tools used: HTML/CSS/SVG/Javascript/Scroll/Codex.
elijha on
Why did you stick two columns related to the amount of *money* in between two very closely related columns about how many *people* are in each group?
anewpath123 on
This is a good chart for explaining why “eat the rich” doesn’t really work out in practice.
The middle class have significantly more wealth overall to siphon from due to sheer numbers
akurgo on
Is this net worth? If so I’m top 10%. Yay!
hallerz87 on
How is wealth being defined?
Badestrand on
I don’t get that graphics. So on Level 4 it is around 1 in 3 people (33%) but also 12% and top 40%? And what’s that capital column? Combined value of all people? A bit confusing tbh.
marcduberge on
Top .03%. I still turn lights off and bulk shop for food and drive 20 year old cars. Mind blown
ICC-u on
I think it would have made more sense if the capital on the right was cumulative
Do the top 1% have 40% of the wealth of ~54% of the wealth.
Criplor on
This is incredibly hard to read if you don’t already know what all the columns are. Capital is not a significantly different descriptor from dollar amount of the class. The capital column should say „total capital“ or „total capital of class“. And why is the percent of population expressed as 1 of x whereas the percent of total capital is expressed as a percent?
Lalalama on
Can you do one about Americans specifically
conventionistG on
I can’t guess what you’re getting at with those little bars. Very poor form not to label anything.
mark35435 on
Yeah, playing with PAYE thresholds will fix this….
maisi91 on
Musk is a billionaire again, since the spacex stock lost it’s IPO gains.
NewNiklas on
Very nice! My suggestion for improvement would be column names.
spleeble on
I find it hard to believe that there are only 78M people in the whole world with $1M+ in wealth.
Are you taking household wealth divided by household size or something?
OldManLaugh on
This is so unfair, how come I’ve only worked a year of my life part time and am in the top 40% of humanity? Meanwhile 350 million people are in net debt. This graph is depressing.
XboxSpartan117 on
My brain broke trying to understand the chart.
Hairy_Guidance5569 on
I wonder if a radar chart would have been better 🤔
monsterfurby on
Are we talking capital or net worth? It goes to below $0, but it also uses the word „capital“, which can’t really coexist in my understanding.
aDeepKafkaesqueStare on
I’m struggling to believe the number of millionaires.
1 in 103 might be true for the western world. If we’re being very generous, that’s like 1 billion people at most, implying 9.7 Mio Millionaires.
So, the rest of the world is housing another ~70 Mio millionaires…?
JohnathantheCat on
Colours are for graphs not text (generally). A good rule of thumb is evergthing you do on a graphic should be deliberate and have a purpose. You should be able to explain every decision you made while producing a graphic, its objective, and other thing considered. This will help your process as well as you result.
Orange numbers in coloumns = OK, change text colour in one column = not OK.
Edit: pretty much everything
nona01 on
What does the right side mean?
AZ_RBB on
What’s the source and methodology?
manrata on
As others have said, needs some tweaks, but I like it.
I find it interesting to think, if only one tier existed, and everyone would have equal amount of wealth, how many people would actually be in the world.
So if everyone was tier 12, there would be only 500 people in the entire world.
Or for tire 6, there would be 195m people in the world.
It’s wild to think any homeowner in Northern Europe is almost certainly in tier 6 or above.
Sermuns on
This is awful to look at. Somehow looks skewed. AI slop.
Chief-Drinking-Bear on
1 in 3k people having $10M+ globally is crazy to me, it sounds like so much money but that’s not even particularly rare
shiromiso on
Strongly suggest to remove the abbreviations (K, M, T) seeing all the actual zeroes removes a layer of abstraction that makes people think the numbers are lower than they really are.
It’s hard to grasp, but you and I are closer to being the second richest person in the world, (Larry Page), than Larry is to being the richest person in the world, Musk.
Numbers and statistics are hard to imagine when you’re dealing with bonker numbers. We’re rapidly moving to a neo feudalist society, but most people are ok with this because they don’t realize the orders of magnitude we are actually talking about .
velveteinrabbit on
Only 2,896 people control almost all the money
Vivid-Way on
gosh, how pretty. and impossible to parse any meaningful insights from.
roth100 on
Is there a graph that shows the growth of billionaires and people in poverty in developed countries? eg for every billionaire there’s a million people in poverty
I_just_made on
The initial design looks good, but the intent is very hard to read. This is not beautiful because the original intent of the figure, the primary goal, is not conveyed clearly.
For instance: what is happening in the second column? It starts scaling in one direction and then… does the opposite?
The color choices and typesetting look good, but more needs to go into this.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
31 Kommentare
Data sources used: UBS Global Wealth Report, World Inequality Database, Forbes World’s Billionaires List, Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances.
Tools used: HTML/CSS/SVG/Javascript/Scroll/Codex.
Why did you stick two columns related to the amount of *money* in between two very closely related columns about how many *people* are in each group?
This is a good chart for explaining why “eat the rich” doesn’t really work out in practice.
The middle class have significantly more wealth overall to siphon from due to sheer numbers
Is this net worth? If so I’m top 10%. Yay!
How is wealth being defined?
I don’t get that graphics. So on Level 4 it is around 1 in 3 people (33%) but also 12% and top 40%? And what’s that capital column? Combined value of all people? A bit confusing tbh.
Top .03%. I still turn lights off and bulk shop for food and drive 20 year old cars. Mind blown
I think it would have made more sense if the capital on the right was cumulative
Do the top 1% have 40% of the wealth of ~54% of the wealth.
This is incredibly hard to read if you don’t already know what all the columns are. Capital is not a significantly different descriptor from dollar amount of the class. The capital column should say „total capital“ or „total capital of class“. And why is the percent of population expressed as 1 of x whereas the percent of total capital is expressed as a percent?
Can you do one about Americans specifically
I can’t guess what you’re getting at with those little bars. Very poor form not to label anything.
Yeah, playing with PAYE thresholds will fix this….
Musk is a billionaire again, since the spacex stock lost it’s IPO gains.
Very nice! My suggestion for improvement would be column names.
I find it hard to believe that there are only 78M people in the whole world with $1M+ in wealth.
Are you taking household wealth divided by household size or something?
This is so unfair, how come I’ve only worked a year of my life part time and am in the top 40% of humanity? Meanwhile 350 million people are in net debt. This graph is depressing.
My brain broke trying to understand the chart.
I wonder if a radar chart would have been better 🤔
Are we talking capital or net worth? It goes to below $0, but it also uses the word „capital“, which can’t really coexist in my understanding.
I’m struggling to believe the number of millionaires.
1 in 103 might be true for the western world. If we’re being very generous, that’s like 1 billion people at most, implying 9.7 Mio Millionaires.
So, the rest of the world is housing another ~70 Mio millionaires…?
Colours are for graphs not text (generally). A good rule of thumb is evergthing you do on a graphic should be deliberate and have a purpose. You should be able to explain every decision you made while producing a graphic, its objective, and other thing considered. This will help your process as well as you result.
Orange numbers in coloumns = OK, change text colour in one column = not OK.
Edit: pretty much everything
What does the right side mean?
What’s the source and methodology?
As others have said, needs some tweaks, but I like it.
I find it interesting to think, if only one tier existed, and everyone would have equal amount of wealth, how many people would actually be in the world.
So if everyone was tier 12, there would be only 500 people in the entire world.
Or for tire 6, there would be 195m people in the world.
It’s wild to think any homeowner in Northern Europe is almost certainly in tier 6 or above.
This is awful to look at. Somehow looks skewed. AI slop.
1 in 3k people having $10M+ globally is crazy to me, it sounds like so much money but that’s not even particularly rare
Strongly suggest to remove the abbreviations (K, M, T) seeing all the actual zeroes removes a layer of abstraction that makes people think the numbers are lower than they really are.
It’s hard to grasp, but you and I are closer to being the second richest person in the world, (Larry Page), than Larry is to being the richest person in the world, Musk.
Numbers and statistics are hard to imagine when you’re dealing with bonker numbers. We’re rapidly moving to a neo feudalist society, but most people are ok with this because they don’t realize the orders of magnitude we are actually talking about .
Only 2,896 people control almost all the money
gosh, how pretty. and impossible to parse any meaningful insights from.
Is there a graph that shows the growth of billionaires and people in poverty in developed countries? eg for every billionaire there’s a million people in poverty
The initial design looks good, but the intent is very hard to read. This is not beautiful because the original intent of the figure, the primary goal, is not conveyed clearly.
For instance: what is happening in the second column? It starts scaling in one direction and then… does the opposite?
The color choices and typesetting look good, but more needs to go into this.