GDP, average wealth and median wealth - what do these tell me?

[Anonymous]

What would you conclude from the figures below? I'm trying to understand how they relate to each other and what overall picture they paint.

GDP per capita is $89,599 in the US and is $65,946 in Australia. So it is 36% higher in the US.
Average wealth is $565,000 in the US and $546,000 in Australia. So it is 3% higher in the US.
Median wealth is $112,000 in the US and $262,000 in Australia. So it is 134% higher in Australia.

[Anonymous]

That would mean there's fewer poor people in Australia but similar outlier ultra wealthy people?

Australia is also much much smaller than the US. Try looking at California or Texas alone instead of the whole thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That would mean there's fewer poor people in Australia but similar outlier ultra wealthy people?

Australia is also much much smaller than the US. Try looking at California or Texas alone instead of the whole thing.

The figures are reportedly per capita so it doesn’t that take into account size?

Why would the number of ultra wealthy be similar in Australia given those figures?

[Anonymous]

Australians are able to save more, so maybe lower cost of living?

[Anonymous]

Australia has a mandatory 12% employer payment into each employees super annotation fun for retirement (along with age based pension and employee personal savings). My guess is the value of the superannuation fund is part of the Australian net worth for the numbers you are seeing.

[Anonymous]

So basically a higher percentage of the population has pension savings plus there is more income equality?

[Anonymous]

Americans produce more on average than Australians.

The total wealth in each country divided by their respective populations is roughly the same.

There is a more distributed pattern of wealth in Australia. There are more ultra-wealthy in the USA.

[Anonymous]

Corporate greed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Americans produce more on average than Australians.

The total wealth in each country divided by their respective populations is roughly the same.

There is a more distributed pattern of wealth in Australia. There are more ultra-wealthy in the USA.

If the US produces more than Australia, why isn’t the wealth per capita higher? Is there not really a correlation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Corporate greed

Can you say "non sequitur"? Probably not, I'm guessing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Corporate greed

Americans spend too much junk. filled with junk stuffs in their garage and park their cars in the street and driveway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans produce more on average than Australians.

The total wealth in each country divided by their respective populations is roughly the same.

There is a more distributed pattern of wealth in Australia. There are more ultra-wealthy in the USA.

If the US produces more than Australia, why isn’t the wealth per capita higher? Is there not really a correlation?

Consumption?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Corporate greed

Americans spend too much junk. filled with junk stuffs in their garage and park their cars in the street and driveway.

Two things can be true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Australians are able to save more, so maybe lower cost of living?

I don't think so. The cost of living is pretty high in Australia.

Australia has a significantly higher minimum wave ($24.95 Australian which is $17.62 USD compared to $7.25 USD).

Australia also has a much more generous safety net, which means that Australians who experience medical crises aren't losing their life savings, and that Australians aren't spending their money bailing out relatives in crisis.

But let's pretend it's the Starbucks. That's much easier to tolerate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Americans produce more on average than Australians.

The total wealth in each country divided by their respective populations is roughly the same.

There is a more distributed pattern of wealth in Australia. There are more ultra-wealthy in the USA.

If the US produces more than Australia, why isn’t the wealth per capita higher? Is there not really a correlation?

Looking into this, it seems like the "average wealthy by household" is calculated by totaling the wealth held by households, and dividing it by the number if households.

If this is the number you are using, then it would seem like the following things would lead to this situation (note: I have no idea if any of these things are true for Australia and the US)

1) Since wealth held by non US shareholders wouldn't be included in this calculation, some of the wealth held by US corporations isn't factored in.

2) If one country has a higher percentage of households with 2 adults, whether due to higher marriage rates, lower divorce rates, young adults staying dependent longer, etc . . . that country would see higher income per household, with the same total household wealth per population.

3) If citizens of one country have higher debt than the citizens of the other country, including medical debt as an example of a situation where US residents are at a disadvantage, then would reflect in lower wealth on this measure.

Now, I realize OP didn't say "by household". If it's "by adult" then 1 and 3 still apply.