General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow much wealth must a person have in order to be "wealthy?"
There have been a number of recent threads here which, taken together, suggest vast differences in how folks in our own party view wealth. All of us can agree that a billionaire is wealthy. That's a given. But, is a person who owns two houses, both of which have mortgages, a wealthy person? What if that person only owns one house, but that house is paid off in full? What about a person who has $500K in a 401(k) or 403(b) account? Does it matter what state or city the person lives in? It seems to me that these are questions we need to have answered prior to the next time our party takes control of either or both the White House and Congress. Especially so since the Trump administration is likely to exacerbate an already enormous national debt, thereby leaving Democrats having to figure out once and for all how to make Federal financial ends meet. One proposal is to implement a wealth tax - Something the country has never before done. But, if we're going to go in that direction, first we need to ask ourselves - "Who's wealthy and who isn't?"
SWBTATTReg
(24,433 posts)you'll never have enough wealth to be wealthy. Hence this is why these so-called persons of wealth keep dialing for yet more dollars, there never is an amount that they'll be happy w/.
Pathetic, isn't it, this chasing after dollars for that elusive 'target', and yet never hit it/make it.
I think some of these people feel that they are only important if they have money to throw into our faces. In my opinion, a lot of them are still pretty big losers.
Unladen Swallow
(371 posts)madville
(7,495 posts)Its just something to be managed with inflationary policy, its too big to reduce. I doubt its even possible to balance the annual budget at this point.
A wealth tax wouldnt even put a dent in it at this point either, the debt and deficits are just too large. Plus theres no political will on either side to pass a wealth tax big enough. Youd need to collect an extra 2 trillion a year just to balance the annual budget and not even reduce the national debt a penny.
A HERETIC I AM
(24,647 posts)assets minus liabilities equals......
When I was a broker, anyone with over $30 million in "Investable Assets" was considered a "High Net Worth" individual.
As Chris rock said it, there is a huge difference between wealthy and rich. Wealth is handed down from generation to generation.
Rich can be blown in a few months on high end call girls and cocaine.
PeaceWave
(1,208 posts)A HERETIC I AM
(24,647 posts)The Chris Rock bit I referenced is pretty funny. It's the first few minutes of this clip from his HBO Special "Never Scared" which was released in April of 2004 ;
Mike 03
(17,522 posts)According to the Charles Schwab Modern Wealth Survey, having a net worth somewhere between $2.2 and $2.8 million constitutes "wealthy" with the different generations defining it slightly differently.
That does include 401K and actual home equity (according to Google Chrome AI)
WarGamer
(15,842 posts)ProfessorGAC
(70,860 posts)We're in the same place.
We're quite comfortable, but I wouldn't say we're wealthy.
Others may differ, though.
We invested early in housing and aggressively in the stock market when both were going up nicely. A lot of it is luck. But its hard to feel wealthy when the average three bed, two bath home around here costs almost a million dollars.
anciano
(1,631 posts)there is, of course, no set amount that is universally accepted as a benchmark.
But from a philosophical perspective, good health is the most valuable asset one can possess.
"The first wealth is health." Ralph Waldo Emerson
WarGamer
(15,842 posts)For example, $100M isn't enough to own a big yacht, mansions and fly private
I'd say $500M+
Happy Hoosier
(8,580 posts)You cant own a superyacht, but you could definitely own a nice yacht. And maybe you cant buy a private jet, but you can certainly lease one.
Johonny
(22,328 posts)Is about the number to live upper middle class off your earnings last I looked. Which is what I think most consider wealthy.
Yeah, I think 500 million puts you rare air. Depends on what the poster means, wants.
ForgedCrank
(2,437 posts)which means I have enough money to pay my bills, and I have an awesome family and incredible friends. That's all I need in order to be wealthy.
Response to ForgedCrank (Reply #9)
anciano This message was self-deleted by its author.
PeaceWave
(1,208 posts)haele
(13,686 posts)I don't know if there's really a metric to measure the difference between rich and wealth. Because when discussing finances, they're kind of two different situations. I suppose if you're wealthy, you're in a position to make trusts and pass down the majority of your funds and property into generational wealth, or to maintain a family business or legacy. Much of your money is not immediately available, but you can still live without worrying about the price of things you want to buy or do, or handling emergencies.
Being rich just means you have enough money you can spend on whatever with the minimum of worry about how much much it costs.
There still needs to be a basic monetary value to set as a baseline - say, being a member of the top .05% income or asset level.
My thought is that wealthy person could be someone who is happy living relatively frugally, but, including assets, might only be just be considered in the top .05% to be able to be disbursed to heirs. Or has over half their wealth in a business or some investment that is not very liquid within the financial baseline set up in the premise.
A rich person might be in the top .02% with mostly liquid assets (or easily accessible assets), but could very well be spending their way into eventual bankruptcy by the end of life.
My FIL was rich, but not wealthy. The money in his trust that will come to my spouse and his sister when each turns 65 pretty much is there for each to pay off any lingering bills and pay for a couple vacation trips - or a decade or so in assisted living or a nursing home if needed.
But all of this is just my opinion. The economic study/dictionary definitions of wealthy and rich I've seen are pretty subjective and interchangeable.
Haele
ProfessorGAC
(70,860 posts)I think that's a pretty good definition.
Want a Ferrari? Go buy one.
Want a condo in Maui? Go buy it?
We have money but we couldn't do those things.
Retrograde
(10,768 posts)"Poor man wanna be rich, rich man wanna be king, and a king ain't satisfied 'til he rules everything" - Bruce Springsteen, "Badlands".
For some people, there is never an "enough" - Bezos and Musk seem to be in this group.
Response to PeaceWave (Original post)
LudwigPastorius This message was self-deleted by its author.
jmowreader
(51,663 posts)You go to the supermarket. You have a list with the food you'll need for a week on it.
You walk into a department and they've got some product that isn't on your list, is pricey and you enjoy eating.
If you can buy that item without having to not get another item on your list, or pay a bill late because you spent the money buying this product, you're wealthy.
Consider Shamsud-Din Jabbar, the guy who committed the New Orleans attack on New Year's Eve. He made a ton of money - well over $100,000 per year - but since he had bills that exceeded his income he was not wealthy.
On the other hand, I can go to the gas station or call the furnace repairman if I need to and not even worry about the bill because I KNOW I've got the money to cover it. Therefore, I am wealthy. And I don't even make a third of what Mr. Jabbar made.
DFW
(56,956 posts)Since there are a LOT of people with more money than I have, I don't obsess about it. The world has a whole lot more people with less money than I. Most of them couldn't care less. To them, I bow in respect.
Greg_In_SF
(95 posts)...of your interest.
That is wealthy.