U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-24-2007, 04:41 PM
 
Location: City of Angels
1,288 posts, read 3,467,029 times
Reputation: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintLaurent View Post
.......And when you produce facts that the City of Los Angeles has more millionaire households than New York City, based on net worth, let me know.
Read my posts again. I never made that claim, therefore I feel no need to produce such evidence.

You are the one who first claimed NY County (Manhattan) was the most wealthy, which has since been disproved and now you want to assert that NYC as a whole has the most millionaires. I'm still waiting for your data and source, please.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintLaurent View Post
And based on these figures alone, one would think that the City of New York would obviously have more millionaires than Los Angeles.

Number of Los Angelenos with income of $200,000 or more: 60,811 <-----Figures are very low.

Number of New Yorkers with incomes of $200,000 or more: 156,621

Don't you think it would be safe to assume NYC has more millionaires than Los Angeles?


But what would you know?
No, it is not safe to make that assumption. Income (cash) is just one aspect of a person’s overall wealth. Most wealthy people have other assets (stocks, bonds, mutual funds, partnerships, real estate holdings, businesses, insurance policies, retirement accounts, pensions, etc.). Just because a lot of people in NYC earn $200K plus a year doesn’t mean that those people are millionaires or that they own very much by way of assets. Also, a lot of millionaires have an AGI of less than $200,000 after all of the deductions they are able to claim. So one could have an AGI of $100,000 or less, but have a net worth of $5 million depending on their other assets. Warren Buffet is the perfect example. He only earns about $100K a year, but he's worth about $53 billion.

Likewise, one could have an AGI of $200K or more, but zero net worth because their debts are equal to or greater than their assets. There are a lot of young guys on Wall Street making $200K a year with absolutely nothing to their names except a mountain of credit card debt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-24-2007, 11:57 PM
 
Location: Henderson NV
1,134 posts, read 11,888 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealAngelion View Post
This discussion is not about billionaires or millionaires who live in New Jersey and Connecticut, among the other states NYC includes in its metro stats. LOL
God! Please let us not get into the many states that NY claims as their suburb territories! You see how that fantasy can be used, especially in an argument like this- or something similar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2007, 11:14 AM
 
Location: somewhere between Florida and New England
333 posts, read 4,756 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by milquetoast View Post
God! Please let us not get into the many states that NY claims as their suburb territories! You see how that fantasy can be used, especially in an argument like this- or something similar.
Claims as their suburb territories? NJ and CT are, in fact, very close to NYC. You can drive 30 miles and go from Connecticut through New York into New Jersey. Looks like you've never been here.

I also find it hilarious that Californians think CA is the wealthiest, New Yorkers think NYC is the wealthiest, folks in DC think they're the most "educated and wealthiest", and so on. Get over yourselves people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 01:25 AM
 
Location: Henderson NV
1,134 posts, read 11,888 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver203 View Post
Claims as their suburb territories? NJ and CT are, in fact, very close to NYC. You can drive 30 miles and go from Connecticut through New York into New Jersey. Looks like you've never been here.

I also find it hilarious that Californians think CA is the wealthiest, New Yorkers think NYC is the wealthiest, folks in DC think they're the most "educated and wealthiest", and so on. Get over yourselves people!
I agree that we should "get over ourselves", but claiming suburbs in Pennsylvania is something else! Looks like you're new here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 08:48 AM
 
Location: somewhere between Florida and New England
333 posts, read 4,756 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by milquetoast View Post
I agree that we should "get over ourselves", but claiming suburbs in Pennsylvania is something else! Looks like you're new here.
NYC doesn't "claim" suburbs in PA. There's one county (Pike) where many NYers are moving to because of very cheap prices and *only* a 2 hour commute each way. Prices in the other suburbs of Connecticut, Westchester, NY and NJ are stratospheric.

Being from NV, I can see how you wouldn't know this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 08:52 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 8,298,227 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by milquetoast View Post
God! Please let us not get into the many states that NY claims as their suburb territories! You see how that fantasy can be used, especially in an argument like this- or something similar.
What are you talking about? Kind of how San Diego uses Mexico as one of its subruban territories? Who cares? It doesn't matter where the lines are, a suburb of a city is a suburb of a city.

New York, as a whole, has a higher concentration of wealth than Los Angeles. The end. Grow up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 09:04 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 8,298,227 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by skatealoneskatetogether View Post
Manhattan is nice. The rest of the dumpy buroughs:staten bronx, queens, brooklyn, are the real face of new york, however. Which is why new york as a whole will never be as nice or as safe as boston,silicone valley, or sf.
This is among the most ignorant statements I've ever heard. Here's "dumpy" Brooklyn...

Park Slope Brownstones, Brooklyn (http://toddcam.com/site/brooklyn/pages/008tcpx.htm - broken link)

http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~s..._ParkSlope.gif

Too many movies? This is typical of an Angeleno.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 8,298,227 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver203 View Post
In reality, the reason why NYers make so much is because of the high cost of living. If they made too much less, it would become a struggle for survival. Also the city is type A central, where making money and achieving is very, very important. Again, if you don't, you wouldn't survive. That's where this attitude comes in. The same can be said for the runner up, just 30 miles away, Fairfield County, CT.
Yes, Fairfield County is extremely wealthy. It's always a contender for richest county in America, and always in the top 5.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 09:26 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 8,298,227 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealAngelion View Post
Likewise, one could have an AGI of $200K or more, but zero net worth because their debts are equal to or greater than their assets. There are a lot of young guys on Wall Street making $200K a year with absolutely nothing to their names except a mountain of credit card debt.
Same can be said for LA. And there are not A LOT of guys on Wall Street with debt like that... Other than security guards and more lower class jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2007, 12:16 PM
 
Location: Arlington, VA
89 posts, read 148,015 times
Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by FutureCop View Post
This is among the most ignorant statements I've ever heard. Here's "dumpy" Brooklyn...

Park Slope Brownstones, Brooklyn (http://toddcam.com/site/brooklyn/pages/008tcpx.htm - broken link)

http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~s..._ParkSlope.gif

Too many movies? This is typical of an Angeleno.
In all fairness, Brooklyn has its share of beautiful areas and dumpy ones. (And the same can be said of LA.) Park Slope and the other brownstone neighborhoods are quite lovely. But spend some time driving around Coney Island, East New York and some other parts of Souther or Eastern Brooklyn, and you'll see a completely different side of the borough. So, while I disagree with categorizing the outer boroughs as dumpy, I also don't think it's right to make it seem as if the tree-lined streets of Park Slope are the norm in Brooklyn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:31 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top