Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Personal Finance
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2015, 10:23 AM
 
5,342 posts, read 6,147,980 times
Reputation: 4719

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jillabean View Post
Does anyone know for "real assets" if you should include the actual value of your home or just the equity in it? Because that makes a huge difference.
I counted value and then subtracted the mortgage remaining from debts.


I think another important factor is where you live. Obviously a place like NYC comes along with much higher income, but it also comes along with higher living expenses. Who is wealthier? A person in the 98% living in NYC or a person with 95% living in KC?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2015, 10:30 AM
 
106,208 posts, read 108,191,934 times
Reputation: 79748
this is just why the discussions about what do I need to retire are so silly. different amounts produce totally different lifestyles based on location.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Riverside, CA
2,404 posts, read 4,394,356 times
Reputation: 2282
Guessed 80%, came in at 96%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Portal to the Pacific
8,736 posts, read 8,639,253 times
Reputation: 13007
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
they should have had an age factor. that is important. i had 40 years to get where i am , how can you compare that to someone 30 with 1/2 as much , they are doing great so far.
I agree. We're 36 and 38... if my husband and I can keep this up for 20 years we're going to be at a great number one day.

I was surprised that we're "so low" given my husband's income (top 6 or 7%) but then I considered the fact that we were still living near the poverty line until 2009: 6 years ago I still was WIC eligible and now I'm "wealthier" than 77% of Americans. The discrepancy in our numbers reflects the aggregate of where we are today and where we were years ago before two substantial jumps in income. In the least I would like our level of wealth to match or level of income but ideally I would like our level of wealth to be even higher.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 11:03 AM
 
28,896 posts, read 54,038,280 times
Reputation: 46668
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
at age 62 measured 97%. you would never believe it living here in nyc.

rate yourself and then see how you actually compare.

Wealthometer: USA
You raise an excellent point. You could be in the 97% in New York and be barely scraping by. Or you could be in the 85% in a mid-sized Southern city and have scads of discretionary income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 02:25 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,380,365 times
Reputation: 9074
estimated 10%, calculated 3% (three).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 02:35 PM
 
Location: North Idaho
2,394 posts, read 3,000,402 times
Reputation: 2934
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
equity only.
No, you should include the total value of your real property. You also include the outstanding balance of any mortgage(s) in the right hand box, so the program calculates your equity.

We are at 98%. I am 59, my wife is 50, no kids. Looking to retire in about 18 months. We currently live in a very high COL area (SoCal), but plan to move to north Idaho at retirement.

Dave
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 02:49 PM
 
Location: Centennial, CO
2,254 posts, read 3,049,483 times
Reputation: 3755
1%

Right now our net worth is negative. Probably because we just bought a house plus have over $110k in student loan debt (only a few hundred in CC debt). I'd expect to be much higher up the scale 10 years from now once we have equity and all loans paid off, plus much more in savings/investments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 03:05 PM
 
777 posts, read 1,867,172 times
Reputation: 1847
I could swear I responded to a very similar post recently referring to the exact same wealthometer. Too lazy to look for it.

Regardless, I'm at 97% - skipped over the estimate so it defaulted to 1%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2015, 03:56 PM
 
11,166 posts, read 15,959,350 times
Reputation: 29858
Guessed 97%; came in at 99%.
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 $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Personal Finance
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top