Everyday Fortunes: A Journey Through the World’s Wealth Levels

Imagine, if you will, our entire world represented by a collection of bubbles, each one a country. Now, if we were to inflate or shrink these bubbles based on their population size, we’d get a pretty interesting picture, wouldn’t we? But what if we then went a step further, arranging them from the poorest to the richest, revealing how people truly live across our planet? We’re going to embark on just such a journey, starting with farmers barely scraping by on less than $2 a day, and climbing all the way up to the dizzying heights of someone like Elon Musk. I’ve got a little bet for you, too: you probably can’t answer two simple questions about the world, questions that stumped fewer than 2% of my own audience. Where does the majority of the world’s population actually live? Low income, middle income, or high income countries? And since the year 2000, has global wealth inequality increased, stayed the same, or actually decreased? Hold onto those answers; we’ll circle back to them.

Life at the Bottom: The Lowest Income Countries

Let’s begin our global tour at the very bottom, shall we? According to the World Bank, the ten countries with the lowest GDP per capita are all, quite starkly, African nations. The further a country’s “bubble” is to the left on our imaginary chart, the lower its GDP per capita. And right at the very bottom, we find Burundi. What’s life like there, you might ask? Well, the median wage in Burundi hovers around $1.80 a day. Families tend to be large, with women having an average of around five children. Tragically, child mortality remains high, with about 5% of children not making it past five years old. Most families, and this is truly humbling, depend on agriculture to simply make a living.

Life in these areas is predominantly rural, with many living in houses constructed from mud bricks. The Gapminder foundation, a fantastic resource, has documented these living conditions extensively. Consider a family of one woman and four children, with a total income of just $0.90 per day. Their home lacks electricity, relying on fire for light and cooking. They sleep on beds made of straw, and their toilet facilities are, to put it mildly, basic. Finding water means a walk to natural sources, carrying it back home. It’s a stark reality: most families in Burundi, and indeed in many of these lowest income countries, live in extreme poverty. But, and this is a crucial point, this initial segment of our chart only represents about 3.6% of the world’s total population. We have a long way to go to truly understand the global picture.

• Median Income: Approximately $1.80 per day in Burundi.
• Family Size: Average of 5 children per woman.
• Child Mortality: 5% of children do not survive to age 5.
• Livelihood: Most families rely on agriculture and live in rural areas.
• Living Conditions: Houses often made of mud bricks, lacking electricity and basic sanitation.
• Population Share: This lowest tier represents about 3.6% of the world’s population.

Climbing the Ladder: The Lower Middle Income World

As we expand our view, adding more countries to reach about a quarter of the global population, we start to see a mix. Mostly African countries emerge, like Ethiopia and Nigeria, alongside Asian nations such as Pakistan and Bangladesh. Let’s take a closer look at Bangladesh. The median income here is around $4.78 per day. Women, on average, have 2.3 children, a significant drop from the previous tier.

Families in Bangladesh, like one with five people, often live in houses with metal roofs. They have beds, which is a step up, and access to pipewells for water, a common source across the country. They also possess basic toilets and designated areas for washing hands. What’s truly remarkable is that over 99% of households in Bangladesh have electricity. Now, this might not sound like a huge deal to some of us, but consider this: in Portugal, a high income country and the speaker’s home, only 64% of the population had access to electricity back in 1970. This little fact, I think, really puts things into perspective. It challenges the notion some people hold that countries like Bangladesh are destined to remain poor. The reality is, Bangladesh, in some aspects, has already surpassed the development level of the Portugal my parents grew up in.

When we add colors to our bubbles based on the World Bank’s income levels, even at this bottom 23% of the population, we find that most countries aren’t considered “low income.” Bangladesh, for instance, is categorized as lower middle income. This brings us back to our first question: where does the majority of the world’s population live? The answer, perhaps surprisingly, is middle income countries. A fact, I must admit, that only 27% of the audience got right, and yes, I got it wrong too. It seems our mental maps of the world can be a little outdated. In 2000, 29% of people lived in extreme poverty. Today, that percentage has plummeted to less than a third. In a single generation, billions have transitioned out of poverty. That’s a quiet, yet profound, transformation.

• Median Income: Approximately $4.78 per day in Bangladesh.
• Family Size: Average of 2.3 children per woman.
• Living Conditions: Houses with metal roofs, access to pipewells, basic toilets, and over 99% electricity access.
• Development Progress: Bangladesh shows significant development, surpassing aspects of high income countries from decades past.
• Global Population Distribution: The majority of the world’s population lives in middle income countries.
• Poverty Reduction: Extreme poverty has fallen from 29% in 2000 to less than a third today, lifting billions out of poverty.

The Middle Ground: Indonesia and Brazil’s Journeys

Let’s continue adding countries until we’ve accounted for half of the world’s population. Now, we see India alongside other nations spanning Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Let’s zoom into Indonesia. Here, the median wage is around $6 per day, and women, on average, have about 2 children. A noticeable shift here is that most families now reside in urban areas, not rural ones. This is a common trend as countries develop: populations tend to migrate from the countryside into cities.

An Indonesian family of four might live in a house equipped with a bathroom, a kitchen, bedrooms, and other amenities that were absent in the lower tiers. Motorbikes are a common mode of transport, a clear sign of increased mobility and economic activity. Most people also have access to the internet and use smartphones, further integrating them into the global digital landscape. We’re definitely entering the richer half of the world now, where daily life starts to resemble what many in developed nations might consider “normal.”

Moving further up, we encounter mostly upper middle income countries from Latin America, Eastern Europe, Africa, and Asia, including China. Brazil, for instance, has a median wage of about $17 per day. Here, women have an average of 1.6 children, marking the first time we see a fertility rate below the replacement level. This is a consistent pattern: wealthier countries generally have lower fertility rates. While hunger remains a challenge in Brazil, it’s a curious fact that more people there die from obesity than from undernutrition. This, too, is a trend observed as countries develop—the percentage of the obese population tends to increase. At this income level, owning a car and a computer becomes common. Brazil is certainly above the global average, but it’s still quite a distance from the world’s richest nations.

• Indonesia: Median wage of $6/day, average 2 children per woman, shift to urban living, access to smartphones and internet.
• Brazil: Median wage of $17/day, fertility rate of 1.6 (below replacement level), more deaths from obesity than undernutrition, common ownership of cars and computers.
• Urbanization Trend: As countries develop, populations tend to migrate from rural to urban areas.
• Fertility Rates: Wealthier countries generally exhibit lower fertility rates.
• Health Transitions: Developing countries often see a shift in health challenges, with obesity becoming more prevalent than undernutrition.

The Richer Half: High Income Countries and Global Disparities

As we add more bubbles, we start to see the emergence of high income countries, bringing us to about 90% of the world’s population. Let’s pick Spain as an example. The median income in Spain is a comfortable $41 per day. In countries like Spain, most people live in good quality housing and have access to decent healthcare, social security, and public facilities. At this tier, you also gain the freedom to travel almost anywhere. A Spanish citizen, for instance, can travel to a remarkable 189 countries visa free. For the vast majority of the world’s population, this simply isn’t the case. If we look at the passport index for every country, it becomes clear that lower income countries generally have a lower number of destinations their citizens can visit without a visa. The freedom to explore the world, it seems, is intricately linked to your country’s income level.

Despite these seemingly good living standards compared to the rest of the world, many people in these high income countries haven’t experienced the same rapid economic growth seen in nations like Bangladesh or Indonesia. This brings us to a rather famous chart, often called the elephant curve, explained by economist Branko Milanović.

The Elephant Curve: Income Growth Across Global Percentiles

The elephant curve plots the income percentile of the global population on its x-axis and shows how much income has grown across that population over a specific period, typically 20 years leading up to 2008. What it revealed was quite striking. People around the 50th percentile of income, largely those in Asia, saw significant gains. Their incomes grew substantially. But then, for the Western middle class—those around the 75th to 80th percentile of the world income distribution—the curve flatlines. In many cases, these individuals experienced growth close to 0% per year over two decades. Meanwhile, the global top 1%, riding the wave of globalization, captured a disproportionately large share of the growth. In recent years, the curve has become somewhat smoother, but the underlying pattern persists: many in the West feel stuck, while much of Asia has continued its upward economic trajectory.

To illustrate the concept of the elephant curve, consider the following simplified representation of income growth across global percentiles:

Global Income Percentile	Approximate Income Growth (20 years up to 2008)	Primary Groups Represented
Bottom 20%	Moderate Growth	Poorest populations
20% – 70% (Peak of “Elephant’s Back”)	Significant Growth	Emerging middle classes (e.g., Asia)
70% – 90% (Flatline/Trough)	Slow to Zero Growth	Western middle classes
Top 10% (Trunk of “Elephant”)	Substantial Growth	Global rich, especially the top 1%

• Spain: Median income of $41/day, good quality housing, healthcare, social security, and visa free travel to 189 countries.
• Elephant Curve: Shows significant income growth for the global middle (especially Asia) but stagnation for the Western middle class, while the global top 1% saw large gains.

Beyond Income: The Weight of Wealth Inequality

Moving even higher, into the final 10% of the world’s population, we find the wealthiest countries, such as the United States. The median wage in the U.S. is about $62 per day. While living standards aren’t dramatically different from the previous tier, people here can generally afford more things. Americans tend to have bigger houses, larger cars, and greater purchasing power across the board. Most Americans, it’s fair to say, are quite rich when compared to the rest of the world. In fact, somewhere between 11% to 12% of Americans fall into the global top 1%, a fact that many of them, I think, don’t quite realize.

But this doesn’t mean every American is rich, not at all. So far, we’ve primarily looked at country averages. However, within each of these “bubbles”—each country—there’s a mix of both rich and poor people. This is where we need to consider inequality within countries.

If we adjust our focus to show how much income the top 10% earn in each country, the picture changes. In the U.S., for instance, the top 10% earn 47% of the total income. The country with the highest income inequality is South Africa, where the top 10% capture a staggering 65% of the income. On the other end, in the Netherlands, the top 10% earn a comparatively lower 45%.

Now, income tells us how much money someone earns, but we should also look at wealth. Wealth represents the accumulated worth of everything you own—your savings, your house, your car, your investments. Arguably, it’s a much better indicator of true inequality. If we switch our chart from income to wealth, the inequality becomes even more pronounced. South Africa again leads with the highest wealth inequality, where the top 10% hold almost 86% of the total wealth. In contrast, in the Netherlands, they own 45%.

Wealth inequality within countries has generally increased over the last few decades. While each country has its own unique trend, in the U.S., the top 10% owned 71% of the wealth in 2021, a significant increase from 25 years earlier. This number also went up in all of the world’s top 10 economies. This trend can have negative impacts, with several economists arguing that the more unequal a society becomes, the weaker its institutions tend to grow over time. The World Inequality Report suggests this wasn’t an inevitable outcome but rather a political choice. They argue that in the 1980s, leaders like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher pushed policies that favored an increase in private wealth while public wealth declined. The argument here being that if governments own less, they are theoretically less capable of tackling inequality.

Income and Wealth Distribution (Illustrative)

Country Example	Top 10% Income Share	Top 10% Wealth Share
United States	47%	71% (in 2021)
South Africa	65%	86%
Netherlands	N/A	45%

• U.S. Wealth: Median wage of $62/day; 11-12% of Americans are in the global top 1%.
• Income vs. Wealth: Wealth (accumulated assets) is arguably a better measure of inequality than income (earnings).
• Within-Country Inequality: Wealth inequality has generally increased, with the top 10% holding a growing share of total wealth in many major economies.
• Political Choices: Some economists argue that policies from the 1980s (e.g., Reagan, Thatcher) contributed to increased private wealth and decreased public wealth, impacting the ability to tackle inequality.

The Global Elite: Tiers of Extreme Wealth

From here on, we’re not talking about countries anymore; we’re diving into global wealth tiers. If your wealth reaches at least $1 million, congratulations, you’re part of the global 1%. This could mean having a million dollars in your bank account, or simply owning a very expensive house. There are approximately 82 million people in this exclusive group, and they collectively own a staggering 38% of the world’s wealth.

To ascend even higher, to the top 0.01%, you’d need a minimum wealth of $21 million. This ultra elite group comprises about 800,000 people, and they hold 11% of the world’s wealth. It’s estimated that private jets, for example, are used by about 0.003% of the population, which would account for roughly 30% of this particular group.

And then, there are the billionaires. If your wealth stands at a minimum of $1 billion, you’ve made it into this rarefied club. There are roughly 3,000 billionaires across the globe, and they collectively own 3% of the world’s wealth. Over the years, the wealth of global billionaires has consistently increased, a trend mirrored by those in the preceding wealth tiers. One billionaire, however, often takes the top spot on Forbes’ list. As of the making of the video, Elon Musk held the title of the wealthiest person in the world, with a net worth approaching $400 billion. Between 2020 and 2024, his wealth reportedly grew at an astonishing average rate of $1300 per second. It’s almost comical to think about: if Elon Musk were to spot a $100 bill on the ground, it would quite literally not be worth his time to bend down and pick it up.

• Global 1%: At least $1 million in wealth, comprising 82 million people, owning 38% of global wealth.
• Global 0.01%: At least $21 million in wealth, comprising 800,000 people, owning 11% of global wealth.
• Billionaires: At least $1 billion in wealth, comprising roughly 3,000 people, owning 3% of global wealth.
• Elon Musk Example: Highlighted as the wealthiest individual, with immense wealth growth.

The Surprising Truth: Global Inequality’s Real Trend

Now that we’ve climbed to the very top, let’s revisit our second question: has global inequality gone up since the year 2000? Most people, and my audience was no exception, would instinctively say yes. And that makes perfect sense, doesn’t it? We’ve witnessed the dramatic rise of billionaires, the growth of the top 0.01%, and the increasing inequality within countries. So, it feels like the obvious answer.

But here’s the surprising truth: the answer is actually “C,” global inequality has, in fact, gone down. How can this be possible, you might ask? It seems counterintuitive. Well, as one economist put it, reducing inequality between countries, say, between Malawi and the UK, is far more significant than reducing inequality within the UK itself. While inequality within countries has indeed increased in many regions, the inequality between countries has decreased.

Consider this: the global top 10% now own 74% of the wealth, which is, surprisingly, less than before. And the bottom 50% now own 2.1% of the wealth. While that’s still not much, it’s a notable increase from the year 2000. If we rewind to 1990, our bubble chart would show a much larger gap between the rich and the poor, with almost 40% of people living in low income countries. The gap between the rich and the poor was truly vast. But as the years passed, billions of people climbed out of poverty, and now, the majority of the world lives in middle income countries.

This doesn’t mean that people aren’t struggling, or that we shouldn’t be concerned about the rising inequality within individual countries. Those are very real and pressing issues. But, speaking personally, I also think it’s incredibly important to acknowledge the immense progress that has been made on a global scale. Most people, myself included, failed these initial questions because, quite frankly, we don’t always have an accurate, up to date picture of the world. It’s a complex place, constantly shifting, and sometimes, the biggest transformations happen quietly, beneath the headlines.

• Counterintuitive Truth: Global inequality has decreased since 2000.
• Key Factor: While inequality *within* countries has often risen, inequality *between* countries has significantly decreased.
• Wealth Distribution Shift: The global top 10% own a smaller percentage of wealth than before (74%), and the bottom 50% own a slightly higher percentage (2.1%).
• Poverty Reduction: Billions have moved out of low income into middle income countries since 1990, leading to a majority of the world living in middle income nations.
• Perception Gap: Our understanding of global economic realities often lags behind actual progress.