Credit Suisse, write less bullshit!
Even the ø 2158329/5.463 means 395k as ø or 2158329/(5.463-1.261) 513k by excluding those with less than 1000 CHF.
If we exclude those with > 10'000'000 CHF and less than 1000 CHF we get (2158329-737734)/(5.463-1.261-0.018) ø339k or ø261k (by considering those with less than 1000 CHF).
If we exclude those with > 5'000'000 CHF and less than 1000 CHF we get (2158329-737734-185933)/(5.463-1.261-0.018-0.027) ø297k or ø228k
If we exclude those with > 3'000'000 CHF and less than 1000 CHF we get (2158329-737734-185933-163288)/(5.463-1.261-0.018-0.027-0.042) ø260k or ø199k
So this is a lot different than your mean (arithmetic average) 600k and median (middle number in a set of values when those values are arranged from smallest to largest) 132k
Your sources: Original estimates by authors 🤦♂️
Even the ø 2158329/5.463 means 395k as ø or 2158329/(5.463-1.261) 513k by excluding those with less than 1000 CHF.
If we exclude those with > 10'000'000 CHF and less than 1000 CHF we get (2158329-737734)/(5.463-1.261-0.018) ø339k or ø261k (by considering those with less than 1000 CHF).
If we exclude those with > 5'000'000 CHF and less than 1000 CHF we get (2158329-737734-185933)/(5.463-1.261-0.018-0.027) ø297k or ø228k
If we exclude those with > 3'000'000 CHF and less than 1000 CHF we get (2158329-737734-185933-163288)/(5.463-1.261-0.018-0.027-0.042) ø260k or ø199k
So this is a lot different than your mean (arithmetic average) 600k and median (middle number in a set of values when those values are arranged from smallest to largest) 132k
Your sources: Original estimates by authors 🤦♂️
Credit Suisse, say less shit! Part 2.
We still need to remember "Under the terms of the settlement, Credit Suisse will pay to the DOJ a civil monetary penalty of USD 2.48 billion"
European Wealth Report is citing Credit Suisse ...
Remember, every report is reporting the 💩 they want. Just an example: Credit Suisse is saying 1.152 mio millionaires in 2021!!!!, 0.884 in 2019 and 19 billionaires in 2019, while Franklin 0.393 mio millionaires in 2023, 0.332 in 2018 and 41 billionaires in 2023, 36 in 2018, UBS 41 billionaires in 2022, Switzerland 0.354 mio millionaires in 2019, ETHZ is writing "The number of billionaires (in real terms of 2020) residing in Switzerland has risen from 45 in 1993 to 128 in 2020", OXFAM "There are 65,095 individuals in Switzerland with a net worth of $5 million or more, with wealth totaling $1.6 trillion. This also includes 4,520 individuals with $50 million or more with combined wealth of $958.7 billion and 40 billionaires" while Switzerland is saying 88195, not 65095 ...
Henley & Partners is reporting 808 individuals with wealth of USD 100 million or more
Universität Zürich (history): "According to tax data linked to the Kriegssteuer, there were 1298 millionaires in Switzerland around 1925 (and among them 380 in Zürich, 198 in Basel and 185 in Geneva), with 61 persons declaring assets over 5 mio CHF: see. «Les millionaires en Suisse», Gazette de Lausanne, 4.11.1926.
Let we check stats for Austria too.
Beer et al. (2006) kommen auf Basis von Erhebungsdaten der Österreichischen Nationalbank (OeNB) aus dem Jahr 2004 zum Schluss, dass das durchschnittliche Nettogeldvermögen österreichischer Haushalte 51.790 EUR betrug (Median: 21.855 EUR).
Laut Umfrage (2006) beträgt das durchschnittliche Bruttogeldvermögen der österreichischen Haushalte 54.666 EUR (Median: 23.579 EUR).
Credit Suisse is reporting a wealth per adult of 91.321 USD in 2000 for Austria ...
More:
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/6
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/485
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/349
We still need to remember "Under the terms of the settlement, Credit Suisse will pay to the DOJ a civil monetary penalty of USD 2.48 billion"
European Wealth Report is citing Credit Suisse ...
Remember, every report is reporting the 💩 they want. Just an example: Credit Suisse is saying 1.152 mio millionaires in 2021!!!!, 0.884 in 2019 and 19 billionaires in 2019, while Franklin 0.393 mio millionaires in 2023, 0.332 in 2018 and 41 billionaires in 2023, 36 in 2018, UBS 41 billionaires in 2022, Switzerland 0.354 mio millionaires in 2019, ETHZ is writing "The number of billionaires (in real terms of 2020) residing in Switzerland has risen from 45 in 1993 to 128 in 2020", OXFAM "There are 65,095 individuals in Switzerland with a net worth of $5 million or more, with wealth totaling $1.6 trillion. This also includes 4,520 individuals with $50 million or more with combined wealth of $958.7 billion and 40 billionaires" while Switzerland is saying 88195, not 65095 ...
Henley & Partners is reporting 808 individuals with wealth of USD 100 million or more
Universität Zürich (history): "According to tax data linked to the Kriegssteuer, there were 1298 millionaires in Switzerland around 1925 (and among them 380 in Zürich, 198 in Basel and 185 in Geneva), with 61 persons declaring assets over 5 mio CHF: see. «Les millionaires en Suisse», Gazette de Lausanne, 4.11.1926.
Let we check stats for Austria too.
Beer et al. (2006) kommen auf Basis von Erhebungsdaten der Österreichischen Nationalbank (OeNB) aus dem Jahr 2004 zum Schluss, dass das durchschnittliche Nettogeldvermögen österreichischer Haushalte 51.790 EUR betrug (Median: 21.855 EUR).
Laut Umfrage (2006) beträgt das durchschnittliche Bruttogeldvermögen der österreichischen Haushalte 54.666 EUR (Median: 23.579 EUR).
Credit Suisse is reporting a wealth per adult of 91.321 USD in 2000 for Austria ...
More:
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/6
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/485
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/349
Correction related to a previous comment.
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/12
The difference between 2 years in Allianz is 33.4k € (2017-2019) = 1.4k € each month (which seems a bit more realistic ...) or 51.5k € (2019-2021) = 2.1k € (which seems less realistic, considering the COVID crisis ... but people still wasting less money for useless things ...) and not 150k € like previously wrote (because we confused gross and net graphics).
Probably the biggest difference is that Credit Suisse is the only who is considering this:
2158329/5.463 means 395k as ø or 2158329/(5.463-1.261) 513k by excluding those with less than 1000 CHF
Meanwhile difference of 2 years is 100k $ vs. 51.5k €, which is still HUGE! between Credit Suisse and Allianz just as examples. Switzerland is reporting that people save around 753 CHF each month if they live alone and 2.2 - 2.3k if they live in 2 (with or without kids), means 1.1k CHF in 2017. This is pretty identical to 2011 where the values were 740 / 1800 (means if you live in a family you can save 200-250 CHF more in 6 years ...).
Of the 1.1 million households with children under 25 years (29% of households) one-sixth consist of lone parents, most often (83%) single mothers.
Let we say a person is saving 1000 CHF (between 1 and 2 people families), this means 12-13k each year.
So in conclusion: you cannot trust any type of stats you see, even the swiss stats are not 100% true, but for sure Credit Suisse is telling bullshit. Smart people don't keep money at Credit Suisse at all and they don't keep money just on one bank.
https://t.me/SwitzerlandFacts/12
The difference between 2 years in Allianz is 33.4k € (2017-2019) = 1.4k € each month (which seems a bit more realistic ...) or 51.5k € (2019-2021) = 2.1k € (which seems less realistic, considering the COVID crisis ... but people still wasting less money for useless things ...) and not 150k € like previously wrote (because we confused gross and net graphics).
Probably the biggest difference is that Credit Suisse is the only who is considering this:
2158329/5.463 means 395k as ø or 2158329/(5.463-1.261) 513k by excluding those with less than 1000 CHF
Meanwhile difference of 2 years is 100k $ vs. 51.5k €, which is still HUGE! between Credit Suisse and Allianz just as examples. Switzerland is reporting that people save around 753 CHF each month if they live alone and 2.2 - 2.3k if they live in 2 (with or without kids), means 1.1k CHF in 2017. This is pretty identical to 2011 where the values were 740 / 1800 (means if you live in a family you can save 200-250 CHF more in 6 years ...).
Of the 1.1 million households with children under 25 years (29% of households) one-sixth consist of lone parents, most often (83%) single mothers.
Let we say a person is saving 1000 CHF (between 1 and 2 people families), this means 12-13k each year.
So in conclusion: you cannot trust any type of stats you see, even the swiss stats are not 100% true, but for sure Credit Suisse is telling bullshit. Smart people don't keep money at Credit Suisse at all and they don't keep money just on one bank.
Most people simply trust ø data, without even thinking about what are the pros and contras of such values. Let we check now mean, mode, median and per capita. What do such datas really mean? See more in the comment - In summary such data are saying nothing helpful, are good just for comparison
Remember that ø data is saying anything about the real situation of each family. Especially because ø get huge influenced by people with high salaries.
1+3+4+6+6+7+8 = 35
Mean = 35/7 = 5
Median means (1 3 4) 6 (6 7 8) = in the middle, so not (1+3+4+6 = 14) 6 (7+8 = 15)
In case there is just 1x6 then we get (1 3) (4 6) (7 8) —> (4+6)/2 = 5 as median and /(1+3+4+6+7+8)/6 = 4.8 as mean
Average = the most shitty useless information on this planet! ø data is saying ANYTHING, like per capita or total! This happens even related to finance / CO2 pollution and all other aspects in your life.
Previously https://t.me/s/PollutionFacts/517 we talked about mean, mode and median, now let we go to the next step, talking about mean (= ø), total and per capita.
As you can see in this picture, total CO2 pollution from China is greater than USA, but a lot of traffic is available from China to USA. In the yellow graphic we can see how GDP in China increased a lot compared to years ago. 2000 there were 1.2 bio people, now 1.4 = 4.5x than USA (+0.058 bio in 23 years, GDP +29k 1.7x compared to +11k 12x in China)
Now let we check the per capita. China has a low per capita, considering the crazy population they have. Can we say that per capita pollution is a great way to measure pollution? Nope.
First per capita is the same shit like ø money you own used by Credit Suisse
https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/302
https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/314
https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/324
because it's enough 3 people earn 30000000 mio, and the ø is already 💩. In such case the median is better https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/332 but not perfect!
Remember that ø data is saying anything about the real situation of each family. Especially because ø get huge influenced by people with high salaries.
1+3+4+6+6+7+8 = 35
Mean = 35/7 = 5
Median means (1 3 4) 6 (6 7 8) = in the middle, so not (1+3+4+6 = 14) 6 (7+8 = 15)
In case there is just 1x6 then we get (1 3) (4 6) (7 8) —> (4+6)/2 = 5 as median and /(1+3+4+6+7+8)/6 = 4.8 as mean
Average = the most shitty useless information on this planet! ø data is saying ANYTHING, like per capita or total! This happens even related to finance / CO2 pollution and all other aspects in your life.
Previously https://t.me/s/PollutionFacts/517 we talked about mean, mode and median, now let we go to the next step, talking about mean (= ø), total and per capita.
As you can see in this picture, total CO2 pollution from China is greater than USA, but a lot of traffic is available from China to USA. In the yellow graphic we can see how GDP in China increased a lot compared to years ago. 2000 there were 1.2 bio people, now 1.4 = 4.5x than USA (+0.058 bio in 23 years, GDP +29k 1.7x compared to +11k 12x in China)
Now let we check the per capita. China has a low per capita, considering the crazy population they have. Can we say that per capita pollution is a great way to measure pollution? Nope.
First per capita is the same shit like ø money you own used by Credit Suisse
https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/302
https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/314
https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/324
because it's enough 3 people earn 30000000 mio, and the ø is already 💩. In such case the median is better https://t.me/s/FinanceFactsTelegram/332 but not perfect!