this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
919 points (99.0% liked)

World News

46426 readers
2101 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Paper in Nature Climate Change journal reveals major role wealthy emitters play in driving climate extremes

The world’s wealthiest 10% are responsible for two-thirds of global heating since 1990, driving droughts and heatwaves in the poorest parts of the world, according to a study.

While researchers have previously shown that higher income groups emit disproportionately large amounts of greenhouse gases, the latest survey is the first to try to pin down how that inequality translates into responsibility for climate breakdown. It offers a powerful argument for climate finance and wealth taxes by attempting to give an evidential basis for how many people in the developed world – including more than 50% of full-time employees in the UK – bear a heightened responsibility for the climate disasters affecting people who can least afford it.

“Our study shows that extreme climate impacts are not just the result of abstract global emissions; instead we can directly link them to our lifestyle and investment choices, which in turn are linked to wealth,” said Sarah Schöngart, a climate modelling analyst and the study’s lead author.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Context and after some searching

  • Global Top 10% Wealth: ~$93,170 (2018)).

  • Global Top 10% Income: ~$39,382 annually (PPP-adjusted).

Wealth source

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/07/how-much-money-you-need-to-be-in-the-richest-10-percent-worldwide.html

Income source

https://wid.world/income-comparator/

[–] piranhaconda@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago

I immediately started searching this up on seeing the article. Should've known someone in the comments already beat me to it. Thanks for the links!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Voyajer@lemmy.world 114 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (9 children)

The threshold to be in the top 10% is €42,980 or $49,000 (grossing from what I can tell).

The top 1% and 0.1% for comparison are 20x and 76x.

[–] tamiya_tt02@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)
[–] LwL@lemmy.world 80 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Yeah, what people forget is that even average americans (and central/northern europeans and some other plaves) are quite wealthy from a global perspective. Many people on lemmy, self included, are in that global 10%.

And many of those emissions aren't something you can just avoid either, they often come as a result of being a user of local infrastructure etc.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And half the time they get mad when you point it out.

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.funami.tech 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In fairness, what are they going to do about being born into a richer slice of the world pie? As shitty as it is, people won't have much sympathy for those doing worse than them unless they've achieved a certain baseline. If they can't conceive of how life could be worse (many issues in this fragment), they won't accept or care that others are suffering.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

At the very least, us 10%ers could be advocating for things that lower the carbon cost of our lifestyle, such as zoning reform.

Note that I'm not talking about reducing the quality of our lifestyle. I'm talking about maintaining or improving the quality while making it more efficient.

It's true. And we should all be doing that. If you're in the US, I promise you there are people in your community/local government who are desperate for any sort of support. Build bike lanes, build community gardens, help your neighbors. A lot of them need it.

My previous statement was purely in reply to people getting mad when you point out that they're in a certain percentile. Realistically, what do you expect people to do with that information? What you're basically telling them is that in Sudan, they'd be the kings of the castle. But that's kind of useless information to someone living in middle of nowhere Kentucky, for example.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 15 points 2 days ago

If my taxes would go towards make that infrastructure sustainable, i would happily pay more taxes. As it stands my taxes mostly go to more Autobahn, upkeep of parking spots, subsidies for desastrous industries and cross-financing the retirement insurance, so the boomers can go on cruise vacations.

[–] NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Is there a source for this?

This was my assumption, but when I searched earlier, I could only find sources citing the top 12% was above $100k

Wiki - Distribution of Wealth

I'm assuming I've misunderstood something.

[–] homoludens@feddit.org 16 points 2 days ago

The article talks about income (the headline seems a bit confusing), the wiki about net worth?

[–] PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

According to Wikipedia, citing the 2022 US census, median annual personal income is $48k, meaning the average american is right on that line.

[–] Noodle07@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

10k€ here, reporting for wealth !

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] seeigel@feddit.org 29 points 1 day ago

Can we do top 1% so that I don't feel included?

[–] JLock17@lemmy.world 55 points 2 days ago (4 children)

If you're reading this, you're in that 10%.

[–] nuko147@lemm.ee 28 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I want to know what part of the two-thirds, the 1% holds.

[–] JLock17@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Undeniably a majority. We can't ignore the fact that we have impact on climate too. Big interest want us to argue over blame rather than try to fix the problem (Them). That said, I don't commute by aircraft daily like Taylor Swift and every other rich person.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t commute by aircraft daily like Taylor Swift and every other rich person.

That shit shouldn't be legal. In short private jets shouldn't be legal IMO.

[–] JLock17@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Yeah, but if they didn't they might actually have to interact with the poors, and they can't have that.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Plus things like planned obsolescence they push for to keep people spending. The system is formed around their whims and the system they want demands waste to continue the flow of money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Global top 10%' or 'access to wealth'

  • You are 18-25, your net financial wealth is $50,000 or more.

  • You are 25-29, your net financial wealth is $100,000 or more.

  • You are 30-35, your net financial wealth is $200,000 or more.

[–] Sixtyforce@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

Even without behavioral changes, nothing I can do with 120k a year will ever surpass somebody having a baby.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

...there is no over 35.

Logan's Run style.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Hmm, I am probably not, 10% is what, 700 million?

Between all the rich people, USA, Canadians, UK, Germany, and the rest pf Western Europe that number likely includes enough people to exclude me as a central European

[–] JLock17@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The last number I was given was that anyone who makes more than a converted $20,000 per year is in the global top 10%. There used to be a global income comparison tool that showed where you stand on the global scale. I feel 90% confident that any individual person reading this is someone who is above that line, especially if they can afford things like internet and electric together. Those kinds of guys are driving cars to work and eating out, instead of making their food every single day and listening to radio because they can't afford any luxuries.

I agree that it ain't exactly smart to say everyone in a developed economy is doing well, but I want to remind anyone reading this to count their blessings and consider their own impact just as much as they try to hold the worst offenders accountable.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Copied from reddit comment

According to https://wid.world/world/#tptinc_p90p100_z/US;FR;DE;CN;ZA;GB;WO/last/us/k/x/yearly/t/false/0/200000/curve/false/country , the global 90th percentile income threshold in 2023 is at about $46,7k USD, market xchg rate.

So yeah, it's quite a bit higher than that, plus I think you vastly underestimate how expensive it is to have your own internet connection and electricity.

And I also make my food everyday that's quite normal for almost everyone but US citizens

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Globally 10% is people worth about 100k USD, which is under the US median for people over 35.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Nice to see the phrase "global heating" instead of the wimpy "global warming" or the even more milquetoasty "climate change". I prefer the phrase "anthropogenic runaway global heating" because it makes clear the scale and severity of the problem as well as its origin, and also for the handy acronym.

[–] benjaminb@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I sometimes call it "planet destruction" or "stupidity of mankind"

Yeah, but those phrases can apply to a whole lot of things.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

But have YOU been to space?

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Wealth is the great filter

[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Context and after some searching

  • Global Top 10% Wealth: ~$93,170 (2018)).

  • Global Top 10% Income: ~$39,382 annually (PPP-adjusted).

Wealth source

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/07/how-much-money-you-need-to-be-in-the-richest-10-percent-worldwide.html

Income source

https://wid.world/income-comparator/

[–] arakhis_@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago

Two-thirds of global heating caused by us here, study suggests (shocker)

[–] CheeseToastie@lazysoci.al 17 points 2 days ago

And in other news water is still wet

[–] toastmeister@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

What do we do, set our inflation target to -2% instead?

load more comments
view more: next ›