The top 10% of earners—households making about $250,000 a year or more—are splurging on everything from vacations to designer handbags, buoyed by big gains in stocks, real estate and other assets.

Those consumers now account for 49.7% of all spending, a record in data going back to 1989, according to an analysis by Moody’s Analytics. Three decades ago, they accounted for about 36%.

The top-level post uses a gift link. When it runs out, there is an archived copy of the article.

    • @commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
      -12•4 months ago

      where I can never afford afford to buy a house

      A house where? In a suburb for $250,000+? You know you can buy houses for <$100k, right? Some people’s cars cost more than my house, but I don’t need more.

      The house I rent is valued at 1.2 million in Melbourne.

      Yeah, you’re part of the problem. You need to be willing a more modest lifestyle. Ask yourself this, if you need more, how do others survive with significantly less? They probably don’t live in major cities, for one. If you think you’re entitled to live in a major city, then you’re part of the problem.

        • @commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
          -7•4 months ago

          Is there any room for ya’ll to spread out and build more?

          And there are no job opportunities for many professions outside the capital cities.

          That’s not how jobs work, mi amigo. The more people that live in a given area, the more jobs will be available. You might not get paid as much, but to make the argument that there’s no work or that your job can’t be done remotely is false.

                • @commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
                  -7•4 months ago

                  I’m definitely not a libertarian.

                  We have a lot of room though and should spread out. Supply and demand. It won’t be glamorous at first, but we should be investing in making more places livable.

                  Think about it like this. There are already people who live in those areas that “aren’t good enough” for you. Why should you get more before they do? Doesn’t it make more sense to improve those areas which will increase the supply of livable places?

                  The fact we never discuss these things shows how far removed we are from wanting actual solutions to our actual problems. It’s why things are the way they are, to be honest.