this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
1062 points (97.3% liked)

Work Reform

13342 readers
404 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anguo@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't really understand your initial assumption. What if someone has 10 million dollars? Would you say he has 0.01 billion?

I think that your theory has some merit, but I believe it's more apparent when we describe the people who own the money, as opposed to the money itself: A millionaire will stay a (multi)millionaire until they become a billionaire.

[–] hogunner@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

That’s my point. We (those of us that aren’t at least millionaires) don’t really differentiate in society between someone that has a million dollars and someone that has 10 million dollars; they’re both stuck in the “millionaires” tier.

So say you are making $50,000 a year, well it’s easy to see how you or someone like you could (theoretically) get to $100,000; that’s just the next tier up. And then it’s easy to imagine someone going from $100,000 to a million because that’s the next tier up again. But once you get there, people don’t tend to think of ten million as a tier and usually not a hundred million either. The next tier in our zeitgeist after million is billion.

So people tend to think of billion being kind of the same as going from $100,000 to $1,000,000. Hence the common disconnect about just how much more money a billionaire has than the common man.