Yeah that number seems super strange, and basing it on income makes little sense unless capital gains and the like are being considered. Even then, someone ultra rich may “appear” to make very little money one year only for their investments to pan out the next year and their gains to be extravagant. This should be based on net worth rather than income.
Net worth is good for talking about redistribution but for carbon emissions income is better. Emissions are largely based on consumption of fuel for cars and planes, meat, energy for climate control of homes ( the larger the home the more energy needed) etc. Consumption is correlated to income level, not net worth. You could inherit a home worth half a million which might put you in the top 1% globally in net worth but if you’re only making $60,000 a year you’re consumption isn’t going to be near a person who makes $150,000 a year but has a lower net worth because they spend it all and have no savings.
Yeah that number seems super strange, and basing it on income makes little sense unless capital gains and the like are being considered. Even then, someone ultra rich may “appear” to make very little money one year only for their investments to pan out the next year and their gains to be extravagant. This should be based on net worth rather than income.
Net worth is good for talking about redistribution but for carbon emissions income is better. Emissions are largely based on consumption of fuel for cars and planes, meat, energy for climate control of homes ( the larger the home the more energy needed) etc. Consumption is correlated to income level, not net worth. You could inherit a home worth half a million which might put you in the top 1% globally in net worth but if you’re only making $60,000 a year you’re consumption isn’t going to be near a person who makes $150,000 a year but has a lower net worth because they spend it all and have no savings.