• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

How much money does it take to be "rich"

I guess that now that you've gotten me thinking about it, I'd say 80th percentile of net value.

I don't think income is fair, that is only THIS year. And that is usually tied to how hard a person works, their current value to society. Minus how much they can cheat or evade on their taxes.

Nor lifestyle, you can borrow some, or stash a lot.

Rich = you've got a lot. So top 20% is my definition.
 
casebro said:
I guess that now that you've gotten me thinking about it, I'd say 80th percentile of net value.

I don't think income is fair, that is only THIS year. And that is usually tied to how hard a person works, their current value to society. Minus how much they can cheat or evade on their taxes.

Nor lifestyle, you can borrow some, or stash a lot.

Rich = you've got a lot. So top 20% is my definition.
Click to expand...

This sounds like as reasonable a definition as any I've heard.

You're talking top 20% in NET worth right? Even this can get complicated because valuing assets can be extremely difficult. For example my largest asset by far is the stock I own in a privately held company. It's not liquid at all and it's hard to account for something like that when calculating net worth.

Anyway if you can calculate a net worth value then the top 20% sound ok but it might be a little encompassing. More like top 5%.

Anyone know what those numbers look like?
 
I agree that net worth is the best yardstick, but 20% seems too inclusive. I would go with 1% myself. In the context of the whole world, that would include many upper-middle class Americans. Whereas someone in the 80th percentile in the context of the whole world is probably not what we would call rich.
 
Last Saturday night, it took about $47 dollars, and some change. It was our second date, and I didn't include the cost of our first date. (she paid half) I never include the cost of a motel room, as I usually am living in one.

Well, you did ask, "be rich", and not, "stay rich".
 
if you can say the statement "It's 4AM in Minnesota, and I really need a camel" and someone can make that happen for you, you're rich.
 
Puppycow said:
Here is a way to compare yourself with the rest of the world:
http://www.globalrichlist.com/
(Although it seems to be a few years out of date, including the exchange rates. Either the US dollar is stronger than it should be or the yen is weaker.)
Click to expand...

It make the same error as I mentioned : not taking into account local exchange rate of goods against money. It takes absolute amount. So it says that I am in the top 0.81% of the world, which is downright false, I am in the median bulk (ok top-heavy median...) in Germany. I am nowhere near 0.81% worldwide.
 
I am rich.

I never earned a top salary, and never accumulated serious money amounts (6+ digits in US$ or Euro), but I earned a good salary and did safe some money.
I am rich because it has always been more than I needed for my actual chosen lifestyle. I am currently taking a sabbatical. I never applied for or got any money from government or social insurances (except for health insurance). I am free of debt.

I know people who earn more than I ever have and struggle to make ends meet - they are working hard to pay the mortgage, and to maintain a lifestyle that includes big new cars, luxury vacations, and what have you. They are not rich, even though they live in the same country, region, and have more money, absolutely, than I do.
 
I would say earning about 4-5 times median salary makes you very much in the national rich category....that would be annual 100 grand plus in the uk.

But on an international level, well most people in the west are rich.
 
With our current savings and with fairly safe investments, my wife and I could live our middle class lifestyle for about five years without working and be broke but debt free at the end of that. When we can do that for the rest of our lives and pay someone else to do home repairs and car repairs instead of me doing them, we'll be rich.
 
Well, some people consider actors and athletes who make several million a year to be rich.

Others would consider the people who pay them are the rich ones...
 
andyandy said:
I would say earning about 4-5 times median salary makes you very much in the national rich category....that would be annual 100 grand plus in the uk.
Click to expand...

High earner doesn't necessarily mean rich.

Investment banks have a concept called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_net_worth_individual; you're in this group if the value of your investable assets (that's assets minus basic stuff like primary residence) is over $1,000,000.

So, it's pretty easy to figure out what you need to be considered rich.
Drevil_million_dollars.jpg
 
timhau said:
High earner doesn't necessarily mean rich.

So, it's pretty easy to figure out what you need to be considered rich.
[qimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/16/Drevil_million_dollars.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I see how net worth makes sense to use - but in some ways I think relative annual earnings are pretty valid. If you earn five times median wage you are rich.... Now if that doesn't equate to high net worth, well you need to sort out your spending, but you're still rich. Simply looking at net worth means someone earning 100,000 a year and spending it on a champagne lifestyle isn't rich simply because they spend their money.....
 
Last edited:
andyandy said:
I see how net worth makes sense to use - but in some ways I think relative annual earnings are pretty valid. If you earn five times median wage you are rich.... Now if that doesn't equate to high net worth, well you need to sort out your spending, but you're still rich. Simply looking at net worth means someone earning 100,000 a year and spending it on a champagne lifestyle isn't rich simply because they spend their money.....
Click to expand...

100k a year isn't anywhere near rich BTW. That's solidyly middle class unless you've made it for a long time and saved up so that you have a lot of investments. 100k a year is actually about the average salary at my company (and it's close to the median as well).
 
timhau said:
High earner doesn't necessarily mean rich.

Investment banks have a concept called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_net_worth_individual; you're in this group if the value of your investable assets (that's assets minus basic stuff like primary residence) is over $1,000,000.

So, it's pretty easy to figure out what you need to be considered rich.
[qimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/16/Drevil_million_dollars.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

If you can calculate net worth, then sure. However, as I pointed out in some above posts it's not always easy to nail down net worth.
 
I consider "rich" to be a freedom from all concerns of material wants and "wealth" the resources to influence society directly.

As Chris Rock said, "Shaq is rich. The guy who gives Shaq his check is wealthy."
 
You are rich if the interest on the interest on your capital is sufficient to maintain the lifestyle to which you are accustomed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom