As my readers know, I follow other PF (personal finance) bloggers, both to learn, and just to see what they’re up to.
A new entry in to the PF blogs is I Am 1 percent, and so far, I’m finding him to be an interesting read. First, a step back. What does 1% mean? Commonly, it’s used to mean those whose AGI (adjusted gross income) is $350K and above. As far as net worth goes, it takes about $6M to be in the top 1% as of 2004. My new blogging friend’s net worth is near the $1 Million level.
As I read about “We, the 99%”, and the animosity toward the 1%, I wonder if the focus on the 1% is even accurate. This fellow (sorry, so far, I’ve not seen a first name, so I guess I’ll call him 1%er until I know better) has a story of growing up lower middle class, going to 6 years of school after high school, and getting into a decent field after graduating. He’s not gaming the system like those who have taken advantage of the financial markets, but seems to have earned his way to a decent income. His wife is also an educated professional, and her income is decent as well. They can make $350K or $400K, but to me, the greatest distinction is the fact that his income is earned, even options that he’ll get in his job are taxed as ordinary income. $400K of earned income will pay twice the tax as those who gross nearly $1Million/yr but get their money in the form of capital gains.
Funny how we group the 1%, as if a guy earning $350K in a regular job has anything in common with the $25 Million per year hedge fund managers. The super-rich are not sharing how their wives also work. Our 1%er vacations on the Jersey shore, and likes his credit card rebates as much as the rest of us do. It seems the way we develop any prejudice, the idea that we can draw a line and say who ever is over that line is different from you and me, is a bit silly, as we have more in common with this 1%er than he does with, what do we call them? Maybe the .1%? Either way, I welcome him to the family of PF bloggers and hope we can all learn from his story.
I found this blog about a week ago as well and have really been enjoying his writing and message.
1%er is in pharmacy sales/promotion. Elsewhere at his site he writes:
“I had made a conscious decision to take a pay cut from typical pharmacy practice by working as a pharmaceutical sales representative in 2002. I did this with a goal and the knowledge that effort and hard work may propel my career up the ladder in the industry and that the income potential is far greater than pharmacy practice.”
Do tell.
Some facts 1%-er glosses over (and, being a sales person, is I am sure well-armed to rebut):
“Some analysts state that the availability of more expensive, state-of-the-art medical technologies and drugs fuels health care spending for development costs and because they generate demand for more intense, costly services even if they are not necessarily cost-effective.”
“FACT: 416 brand-name drugs had extraordinary price increases” — GAO, Dec. 2009
I am not sure how 1%er can claim not to be stereotypical and promote prescription drugs and/or other pharma technology (a leading cause of the explosion in health care costs) with a straight face. The causes of his salary increases are as much a reflection of increases in prescription drug and pharma technology charges to the public, without a correlating improvement in health.
This blogger calls his practices “biblical.” Is this really necessary? He praises Warren Buffett in the same line. 1%-er should notice that Buffett does not wear his religion on his sleeve.
1%er writes that his goal is for people to “get a better understanding and appreciation” for him. When he gets a better understanding of the advantages of being raised in a two-parent household with parents who kept him well fed and clothed, and encouraged his pursuit of math and science, parental participation being the #1 predictor of academic success, then he might get an iota of appreciation from me.
Thanks for the visit and comment, JT!
@JoeTaxpayer Thanks for the post!
@elle..i’m not a sales person or in promotion. I’m in drug development. You take 1 report and hold it as truth, when you should take a look at several non-biased reports. The fact is, yes, there are some drugs that have no incremental benefit than standard of care, but on the other hand, there are drugs that save, enhance, or improve life. That’s a fact.
And yes, my calling of my finance practices as “biblical” is necessary because it is the main driver of how I save, invest, and allocate my money.
Lastly, yes, I want people to appreciate the majority of 1%’ers, including 1%’ers who made it coming from poverty and from single parent households. It doesn’t matter where you come from….anyone can be a 1%’er. Being a 1%er is a mindshift change in how you approach saving, investing, growing, and giving away your money.
@Elle, the cost of prescriptions has more do with the bargaining power from the rest of the world than salespeople. I am not a drug salesperson, but I do know that Americans pay for far more than their proportional share of drug research costs. Every other country negotiates for a lower rate as part of a big contracted purchase. That system isn’t in place in the US.
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
@1%er – welcome to the PF blogging community!
JT (not Joetaxpayer), respectfully, I will continue to be dissatisfied with the player for plying snake oil, as in the case of drugs whose efficacy is shown to be nil or even dangerous. And yes, you and I are paying for pharma’s largely inadequate research, all to make a buck via fraud.
@Elle, your thinking is flawed. Should we cease air travel because of a few plane crashes? In other words, should we cease drug research & development because there are some drugs that have been shown to cause harm? I’d say that there are more success flights than unsuccessful flights…likewise, pharmaceuticals have done more good than harm.
I Am 1 Percent, that’s not my thinking, and a fair reading of my comments says as much. But your surmising it is continues to be a comment on your approach. 😉
My comments speak for themselves. I stand by them. Anymore guesses as to my position, such as I am part of the angry 99%ers, will not be appreciated.
I do not care for the 99%’ers mostly uninformed movement but the movement does have some good points. (Indeed, I am so enamored of who Romney is that I switched parties to vote for him in my state’s primary.) I won’t sully JoeTaxpayer’s forum with a dispute on a matter on which I feel strongly and yes, as a matter of Jewish, Christian (and Muslim, Hindu and ethical) religious conviction.
I do appreciate your response. It is enlightening, if not on one level, than another.