A kilo of gold is worth about $193k currently, which depending on where you live and how old you are means different things. For example, if that was your whole net worth and you are a Baby Boomer in the US you’d be about $1.5M below the average family. If you’re under 35, though, you’d be slightly above average. (Via kiplinger)
FWIW because the top 1% have so much wealth they skew the average significantly - overall the median net wealth in the US is right around that $193k number, but the average is just over $1M, which is pretty amazing.
$200K in net wealth would just about put you into the global top 10% and into the top 1% if those were your earnings for the year.
A kilo of gold is worth about $193k currently, which depending on where you live and how old you are means different things. For example, if that was your whole net worth and you are a Baby Boomer in the US you’d be about $1.5M below the average family. If you’re under 35, though, you’d be slightly above average. (Via kiplinger)
FWIW because the top 1% have so much wealth they skew the average significantly - overall the median net wealth in the US is right around that $193k number, but the average is just over $1M, which is pretty amazing.
$200K in net wealth would just about put you into the global top 10% and into the top 1% if those were your earnings for the year.
You added $100k by typo.
Ah damnit so I did. The rest of the numbers are true, just not as close to the 1kg’s worth as noted.
I’d say that the median is the average in this case. The mean usually works as a mathematical average, but in this example, it’s clearly skewed.
The difference isn’t between median and average, but between median and mean.