i consider statistics to be a good tool in general - but of course only if used correctly (as with any tool, like using a hammer when you have to drill a hole might create a hole but more repair work would be needed and the hole would likely neither be of correct shape nor stability then)

so use the median to determine the middle, not the average. (because when A robs B everything he has, the average of what both have does not change a single quantum but poverty was increased, and that happens since invention of colonisation and other crimes a f***ing LOT and it did not stop yet)

so determine the middle class by median of what ppl earn/have over the whole world. if you limit to anything smaller than the world, you're manipulating by maybe favoring robbers, betrayers, murderers and enslavers, so use the whole world median or you end up with lies only.

as i noted colonisation and slavery, the wealth that had build upon such, is in fact just part of (historic) debt.

well lets see, where i am when i guess the worldwide wealth median.

I do not live paycheck-to-paycheck any more for more than a decade, i own a 22year old economic car ( that does not look shiny but the mrchsnic says its secure), but i own no property and pay rent for a 60m2 flat where i live solo. thus i am rich. i neither feel safe financially nor feel rich, nor would i really know how to buy a house or a yacht, but compared to the majority of people on the world, i think i am to be considered rich. I can decide to buy smaller things from my monthly (40h/week) income without the need of thinking, that maybe most of worlds population (the median) would have to save money for in advance or would buy on debt. This alone more than often already is a luxury of the rich: "just buy it (if it does not ruin you)". However, all of my "luxury" would not exist if i wouldn't try to save money or be near to 'nothing' if i had any children to take care for. a generation ago it was possible to build a house, have a car, pay children, pay a bit extra for your non-working wife so she can go shopping AND go to holiday once a year in the expensive season together with the kids by only ONE person doing the same working hours per week as i do today. I do not see this even partly possible today and i do not feel rich enough to be able to finance a child. am i as poor as i am rich just because of how bad the world had beend changed since? maybe. i guess because of the "wealth transfer" to the rich (where i already "profit" a bit from, but also are ripped off by it) all humans on average(!) are more poor than one or two generations ago, while only a very small fraction of the world actually really profits from that transfer.

The more wealth the rich accumulate, the more quickly they spread more poverty day by day, and the more instability in general is created too. This is what i genuinely believe. But where exactly do i stand in this scenario, comparing myself with the median that i only can imagine what it probably is while all measurements for how rich or poor i am i come up with seem really unusable today.

The by far more easy way is to say "i am NOT rich", point with the finger at someone else who is driving in his roaring and shiny luxury car to his private jet that will bring him to wherever his captain has maneuvered his billionaires yacht to just to jump into the water there. thats an easy view: the others are rich, but not me. this would be an easy view, but could it also be true? i guess not.