This figure is based on purchasing power parity (PPP), which basically suggests that prices of goods in countries tend to equate under floating exchange rates and therefore people would be able to purchase the same quantity of goods in any country for a given sum of money. That is, the notion that a dollar should buy the same amount in all countries. Hence if a poor person in a poor country living on a dollar a day moved to the U.S. with no changes to their income, they would still be living on a dollar a day.
Until the liberalisation of 1991, India was largely and intentionally isolated from world markets, to protect its economy and to achieve self-reliance. Foreign trade was subject to import tariffs, export taxes and quantitative restrictions, while foreign direct investment (FDI) was restricted by upper-limit equity participation, restrictions on technology transfer, export obligations and government approvals; these approvals were needed for nearly 60% of new FDI in the industrial sector. The restrictions ensured that FDI averaged only around $200 million annually between 1985 and 1991; a large percentage of the capital flows consisted of foreign aid, commercial borrowing and deposits of non-resident Indians.[278] India's exports were stagnant for the first 15 years after independence, due to general neglect of trade policy by the government of that period; imports in the same period, with early industrialisation, consisted predominantly of machinery, raw materials and consumer goods.[279] Since liberalisation, the value of India's international trade has increased sharply,[280] with the contribution of total trade in goods and services to the GDP rising from 16% in 1990–91 to 47% in 2009–10.[281][282] Foreign trade accounted for 48.8% of India's GDP in 2015.[11] Globally, India accounts for 1.44% of exports and 2.12% of imports for merchandise trade and 3.34% of exports and 3.31% of imports for commercial services trade.[282] India's major trading partners are the European Union, China, the United States and the United Arab Emirates.[283] In 2006–07, major export commodities included engineering goods, petroleum products, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, gems and jewellery, textiles and garments, agricultural products, iron ore and other minerals. Major import commodities included crude oil and related products, machinery, electronic goods, gold and silver.[284] In November 2010, exports increased 22.3% year-on-year to ₹850.63 billion (US$12 billion), while imports were up 7.5% at ₹1,251.33 billion (US$17 billion). The trade deficit for the same month dropped from ₹468.65 billion (US$6.5 billion) in 2009 to ₹400.7 billion (US$5.6 billion) in 2010.[285]

But when so many turn down leasing one and one-half acre for one Wind Turbine for each 80 acres, that lease certainly does not materially affect the rest of the Farm or Ranch grazing pasture and the lease pays much more than the farm crow or grazing pasture lease, just because some lawyer said the lease was too long: 30 years plus 30 year option = 60 years, and the wind turbine company has selling production/electricity contracts for the next 150 years – which is needed to obtain financing!


In 2015, a total of US$68.91 billion was made in remittances to India from other countries, and a total of US$8.476 billion was made in remittances by foreign workers in India to their home countries. The UAE, the US, and Saudi Arabia were the top sources of remittances to India, while Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal were the top recipients of remittances from India.[316] Remittances to India accounted for 3.32% of the country's GDP in 2015.[11]
After these tenants move out, I'm thinking of just keeping the rental empty with furniture. It sounds stupid to give up $4,200 a month, but I really hate dealing with the homeowner association, move-in/move-out rules, and maintenance issues. Given that the condo doesn't have a mortgage and I have to pay taxes on some of the rental income, I'm not giving up that much. The condo can be a place for my sister, parents, or in-laws to crash when they want to stay in SF for longer than a week or two.

Now, all that said, if capital (savings) grows faster than the growth of the economy, those with savings will see their wealth grow at a faster rate than those who rely on the growth of their income. While this is not an extension of Piketty's argument (you can't take an idea that applies to a population and a whole economy and boil it down to the individual like this), it's not an unreasonable conclusion to take and apply to your own life. (Piketty does talk about this on an individual level, but says it's more impactful for billionaires vs. millionaires – though we have limited data into individuals)
A lot of people these days are moving towards the two job concept. Amongst the people i know who have applied this in their life; the primary reason is that the 9 to 5 job pays their bills, lets the fire burning in the kitchen, and the second job is where their passion lies. This is the passion, which might have been forgotten while growing up, or is not a viable primary income source.

These days, low-risk bond yields aren’t enough to meet most income needs. When investing in bonds, the income typically comes as coupon payments – contractually guaranteed interest payments at predictable intervals.  There are many kinds of bond income available, so you must strike a balance between reaching for higher income (yield) and limiting risk.
×