Reddit reviews The Haves and the Have-Nots: A Brief and Idiosyncratic History of Global Inequality

As far as I can see, Joe is totally correct here. World Bank Economist Branco Milanovic has it in his book, but if you don't want to read the book, you can check out ForeignPolicy.com's analysis
or the Daily Mail's take on it. If you don't like those sources, Investopedia has an analysis
of Oxfam's data.

OP made some logical mistakes. Obviously, the USA is the richest country with the highest population, and takes up a disproportionate amount of the top 1%. Other countries between #8 and #1 are places like Qatar or Luxembourg which don't have large populations.

You need to make $35k per year to be in the global 1%.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465019749/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=fopo-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0465019749

It's true. Only 60 million make it into the top 1%, with $34,000/year. Half of that 1% (29 million) live in the US. The number comes from Branko Milanovic's work, and his book The Haves and the Have-Nots.

Here are some articles on it from well respected organizations:

http://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/inequality-and-rise-global-1-great-new-paper-branko-milanovic

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/02/27/were-all-the-1-percent/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/garyshapiro/2012/05/30/we-are-the-worlds-one-percent/#7db36adf20f0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/americans-make-up-one-half-of-the-one-percent_n_1183713.html

However, keep in mind they all cite the same source, which is Milanovic and his book, and were all written at around the same time, so I assume it was Milanovic's publisher paying a PR firm to get these written. But that's pretty much how most media works now days. So if you are still skeptical of the number, I suggest reading the book, or finding some of Milanovic's published papers and reading through the methodology used to come up with his numbers.

Another fantastic book on the subject is Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century. I highly recommend reading it. Picketty actually expected huge amounts of controversy when he released his book, and was surprised to find out that not many people disagreed with his methodologies and conclusions. Which is pretty scary in itself.

Older article, but that figure for top 1% has been pretty much around that number for quite a while now. https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/02/27/were-all-the-1-percent/

​

" So by global standards, America’s middle class is also really, really rich. To make it into the richest 1 percent globally, all you need is an income of around $34,000, according to World Bank economist Branko Milanovic. The average family in the United States has more than three times the income of those living in poverty in America, and nearly 50 times that of the world’s poorest. Many of America’s 99 percenters, and the West’s, are really 1 percenters on a global level. "

According to Branko Milanovic from the World Bank, income above $34,000 qualifies for the "Global 1%" status (source: Foreign Policy. So if you have more than €26,000 annually, you belong to the Global 1%.

Keep this in mind when whining about how unjust everything here is. Not directed at you Taenk, but generally speaking.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/02/27/we_are_all_the_1_percent

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465019749/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=fopo-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0465019749

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2011/10/28/attention-protestors-youre-probably-part-of-the-1-.aspx

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082385/We-1--You-need-34k-income-global-elite--half-worlds-richest-live-U-S.html

The Amazon link is a book by an economist with the World Bank who came up with the $34,000 number.

In the interest of fairness, though, I also found this:

https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=60931FDE-A2D2-F568-B041B58C5EA591A4

That's a Credit Suisse report that backs up your statistic.

Disclaimer: I am not an economist, I don't know what makes a good source here and what doesn't. I also have no idea where any of this data came from (for any of them). All I know is what they said.

With that being said, Needing 800k to be in the global 1% is hard for me to believe. I actually would have thought the number would have been somewhere more between our two numbers. It's possible that the 34k number is assuming the US isn't in the mix at all, though that doesn't make sense to me.

Note: I didn't make this post to prove you wrong or out of spite. It's just an interesting subject to me. So please don't get offended or upset that I replied.