2

According to this news more than 50% of people would be middle class: http://www.economist.com/node/13063298, the news is from 2009 so maybe now it would be around a 48% or the like considering there's a world economic crisis, considering that news true.

However that seems to be the opposite than for example this other news: http://www.theguardian.com/money/2006/dec/06/business.internationalnews. I mean, if the 10% of population has the 85% of resources we would need an impressive technology to make a good amount of that people middle class, we have much better technology that centuries ago, but still I feel we'd need one that would make sci-fi films look like prehistoric times.

If that weren't enough this other news shows that there more rich people: http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/29/news/economy/billionaires-oxfam/index.html, and if there's more rich people obviously there's going to be more poor people.

I don't know very well what to think, what I find more possible is a 25% of people being middle class or higher and rest low class. But well, I'd like to know from accurate data how exactly is the world wealth distributed.

closed as unclear what you're asking by Oddthinking May 21 '15 at 2:13

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 6
    What is the definition of "middle class"? – iamnotmaynard May 20 '15 at 21:26
  • 2
    @iamnotmaynard: If we use a simple bell curve distribution, the question becomes an example of circular reasoning: those in the middle are middle class because they're in the middle :-) Also, it does not follow that more rich people means more poor people. Economics is not a zero-sum game. – jamesqf May 20 '15 at 22:31
  • 4
    @jamesqf Right, that was my thinking. The middle two quartiles seem a reasonable range for the middle class, and that would happen to add up to exactly 50%. If we then define the rich to be the top 25% and the poor to be the bottom, then it would be correct that more rich implies more poor. But this would be meaningless. – iamnotmaynard May 20 '15 at 22:34
  • 1
    Definition of middle class is a class between working class and upper class. So it's not really defined by percentiles of income distribution. Also, the reason Economist gives for growth of middle class, is that the distribution is skewed, rather than being perfectly Gaussian. – vartec May 20 '15 at 23:05
  • 3
    Is this like the statement that "50% of Americans have below average IQ"? – hdhondt May 20 '15 at 23:10

Browse other questions tagged .