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.
Wealth is relative so it depends upon who it making the judgment. Congress in this country apparently thinks that an annual income of $250,000 qualifies you as 'wealthy'. Net worth is a harder measurement but if you look at inheritance taxes you might surmise that wealthy starts at 1.5 million.
It depends…. Someone with an income or worth ten times your own usually appears to be wealthy.
Wealth is relative so it depends upon who it making the judgment. Congress in this country apparently thinks that an annual income of $250,000 qualifies you as 'wealthy'. Net worth is a harder measurement but if you look at inheritance taxes you might surmise that wealthy starts at 1.5 million.
It depends…. Someone with an income or worth ten times your own usually appears to be wealthy.
I consider a person wealthy when s/he doesn't have to work for her/his money, but is able to live off of the interest generated by investments. I always figured that no matter how much money I made (and my spouse and I both have very good incomes), I can't consider myself wealthy if I have to work for that money because despite whatever high salary my spouse and I earn, either or both of could lose our jobs leaving us without that income.
When I was a child, my only wish was to be able to have 1 million dollars, so that I could get 5% interest --or 50,000.00-- and never spend the principal.
I've since amended that figure upwards and have now decided that having 2.5 million dollars invested, being able to get 5% interest--125,000.00--per year
and never spend the principal would make me feel well off. Of course, this assumes that I would have no mortgage or other large oustanding debts. In fact, saving this amount of money is the goal my husband and I set for our retirement. We feel that not having to work, the 125,000.00 in interest along with both of our retirements and our social security and no outstanding debts will put us in the wealthy category.
I think a person is wealthy if they can comfortably live and do what they want within the context of their income, with sufficient funds left over to handle the unexpected expenses.
This varies on where and how you live, but that would be my definition.
According to Gallup, the public's median definition of "rich" was an income of $120,000 -- or assets of $1 million.
When the same question is asked of money-savvy readers, the majority of the more than 11,000 who responded felt that they would need at least $5 million to consider themselves rich.
According to Gallup, the public's median definition of "rich" was an income of $120,000 -- or assets of $1 million.
Assets?? I'm assuming the house is included?
Well I'm "Rich" and I'm sure a pretty good % on this forum are too. Boy I guess since I'm now "Rich" I might as well retire.
Quote:
When the same question is asked of money-savvy readers, the majority of the more than 11,000 who responded felt that they would need at least $5 million to consider themselves rich.
Darn...I'm no longer "Rich" . Oh well it was good while it lasted. I guess my parents still fit the bill though.
Here's another one that ought to be interesting! How much annual income do you think categorizes a person as wealthy?
One man's 'comfortable' is another man's 'wealthy'. Even the rich invest to get richer. To me, I'd say wealthy means never seeing the bottom of the till, being able to vacation, buy luxury cars, travel and know that your money will just go and make more money... sorta like rabbits make more rabbits.
Wealth is relative. To whom are you comparing yourself, your billionaire brother or someone just getting by? Is someone just getting by wealthy compared with someone else?
We are obsessed with $ figures - quantitative rather than qualitative.
I think a person is wealthy if they can comfortably live and do what they want within the context of their income, with sufficient funds left over to handle the unexpected expenses.
This varies on where and how you live, but that would be my definition.
And a good and rep-able definition it is but I have to spread it around some more.
I don't think we'd be considered "wealthy" by any reasonable measure (a few needy children who see us as "deep pockets" notwithstanding) but we love where we want to be in a house we love and meet all our obligations with money left over for emergencies and fun. To us, that's "wealthy" and actually isn't really dependent upon income.
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.
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.
. Boy I guess since I'm now "Rich" I might as well retire
. 
. Oh well it was good while it lasted
