Income isn’t the best measure on that scale, due to the countervailing force of cost of living within different countries. USD$32k/annum goes a lot farther in Mumbai than it does in L.A.
Are the article indicates, wealth is the better measure of who’s in the global 1%. If you’ve been able and fortunate enough to amass USD$770+ in net worth you could conceivably realise that USD$32k/annum income – funds to be applied in the country or countries of your choice – without doing a lick of work.
If you’re an American, think about how many people you run into every day who make $32000+/year. Now think about how many of those people have USD$770k+ in the bank and their home equity and possessions and are effectively debt-free.
In these discussions, I always make a point of illustrating this distinction because conservatives* constantly use the income measure as a cudgel against “spoiled” and “ungrateful” Americans who argue not for Communist wealth re-distribution but simply for a domestic society that isn’t dangerously unequal.
[* which I know you are not]
