Does having a million dollars still qualify as rich?

[Corcaigh]

40 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

 

Meh... rich people aren’t happy. Oh sure, they think they’re happy. They feel happy all the time. But trust me, they ain’t happy.

Money can't buy you happiness, but it can buy you a yacht big enough to pull up right alongside it.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

6 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

Money can't buy you happiness, but it can buy you a yacht big enough to pull up right alongside it.

 

 

[mcsluggo]

$1 million isn't close to rich anymore.... particularly if that includes house equity, cars...etc... 

 

if you are single, childless and 85 and have $1 million in cash you MIGHT call that rich... but it also STILL might not be enough to cover your healthcare/assisted living if your body chooses to drag out the dying process.     

[PleaseBlitz]

Money, if it does not bring you happiness, will at least help you be miserable in comfort.

 

Helen Gurley Brown

[NoCalMike]

Money doesn't bring you happiness, but it also doesn't hurt the cause in a lot of cases.  I don't think it is a matter of people wanting to be rich so much as not being in the situation where a sudden car breakdown will cost them a job because they can't afford to fix it and/or go get a new car right away.

[skinsmarydu]

Most certainly for me. I'm frugal, and am not remotely interested in having better stuff. I'm more into great experiences. Gen X. 

 

[ClaytoAli]

I hate to have to say this but, I have it and it’s in your bank accounts.

 

wait.......I am slipping......

[abdcskins]

I have $12,103.97 in the bank. Am I rich?

[TheDoyler23]

1 hour ago, abdcskins said:

I have $12,103.97 in the bank. Am I rich?

No, but you can handle an unexpected bill, car repair or short term job loss. 
 

That’s better than a staggering percentage of Americans. 

[Kosher Ham]

Short by one zero. 

[PleaseBlitz]

I just have a problem with people defining "rich" as "I don't have to work anymore."  I define it as people who work, but can afford all of the things they want, which includes a nice house in a nice neighborhood (but not a pointlessly large mansion), a nice car (but not a Ferrari), and the ability to buy consumer goods and experiences (travel, fancy restaurants, top shelf booze) without having to worry too much about the price tags.  

[TheDoyler23]

7 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I just have a problem with people defining "rich" as "I don't have to work anymore."  I define it as people who work, but can afford all of the things they want, which includes a nice house in a nice neighborhood (but not a pointlessly large mansion), a nice car (but not a Ferrari), and the ability to buy consumer goods and experiences (travel, fancy restaurants, top shelf booze) without having to worry too much about the price tags.  

 

AND set those bills to auto-pay! 

[Renegade7]

18 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

With all the recent talk about wealth taxes and one percenters and such, does simply having a million dollars mean you are rich. I am not talking about having a million dollar salary, or multi-millions, but rather, just crossing over the million dollar threshold in your savings or 401k.

 

To me, the answer is no, because I would define rich as having enough money so that you never have to work again.

 

Unless you are a senior citizen, you can't live off the after-tax interest and pay for health insurance, a mortgage, and still put enough away to offset inflation. You can retire much sooner, for sure, but not tomorrow, or next year. You would have to keep working for another 5 to 10 years until the house is paid off and compound growth/interest has nearly doubled your savings.

 

Ever heard the saying "Shaq is rich, the person who signs Shaq's checks is wealthy"?

 

I would like to know how many people dont have a million dollars for context, or at least the stat that best represents that answer.  Theres problems we all share as humans, but let's be real, if you have a million dollars in anyway shape or form you dont have a lot of the problems that people not in that group do have.

 

How many people could wipe out their student loan debt with a million dollars and still have money left over for a down payment on a house?  Those two things are basically kneecapping my entire generation in the US.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

You rich cash chuckers put down payments on your house? damn

[Riggo-toni]

@Renegade7, it's not unique to your generation - it's been that way for all post-boomers. I finished grad school in 92 with over 30k in debt and after doing temp work for peanuts, had to settle for a desperation job at 19k/year. With inflation I would guess that's about the equivalent today of 50k debt on a 35k salary.  After a BA in French and a Master's in International Business (I spoke 3 languages then, and could read in 5), I ended up getting training in programming in order to land a job with a living wage.

 

I am now 56. I am putting nearly 20% of my income into 401k and a Roth IRA. I will likely cross the million dollar threshold sometime in the next ten years if the stock market continues to go up at least close to its current pace.  But I am realizing that that's likely not going to last my entire life if I retire at 66.  My father lived to be 93, and my mother is still alive at 88, so figuring on 25 years post-retirement combined with the loss of value in money due to inflation, and I realize I may be facing a shortfall near the end.

[The Evil Genius]

Which is why I'm thankful that almost  19 years ago I got into state government with a defined pension plan (despite the lack of yearly bonuses and pay parity to the private sector).

 

When I retire I'm looking at X amount of years times X percentage  times X salary until I die. Roughly 91% of my salary at 63 if I work that long. 

 

Of course I'm paying 8-10% of my salary pretax every paycheck for that plan..plus stashing a small amount into a 457b. And of course SS if it's around still in 20 or so years. 

 

But yeah..having a mil (especially if its liquid) is still rich in my books.

[Renegade7]

@Riggo-toni I'm bout to be in a meeting and will mull on your response before I respond back.  I'd say the average debt to income ratio for Millenials is higher then previous generations in regards to student loan debt, but need numbers I cant pull off my head to keep conversation honest. Valid point on folks living longer, but that's more about the changing dynamic of life expectancy versus what it's like to not have a million dollars, imo

[Corcaigh]

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/14/the-net-worth-of-the-average-american-family.html

 

50th percentile American family has a net worth of $97k

 

Median net worth of U.S. families based on the age of the head of household:

Age 35 or younger: $11,100
Age 35-44: $59,800
Age 45-54: $124,200
Age 55-64: $187,300
Age 65-74: $224,100
Age 75 or older: $264,800

 

And here’s the mean net worth of U.S. families based on the age of the head of household:

Age 35 or younger: $76,200
Age 35-44: $288,700
Age 45-54: $727,500
Age 55-64: $1.17 million
Age 65-74: $1.07 million
Age 75 or older: $1.07 million

 

This no doubt includes home equity, so another survey shows 80% of American families are living paycheck to paycheck.

 

This net worth percentage calculator says $1M puts you at the 88th percentile: https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/

 

The article linked at the top came up with $2.37M for 'wealthy' from a Charles Schwab survey which is the 95th percentile.

 

[twa]

can you add in future SS checks to feel better?

[Riggo-toni]

3 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

@Riggo-toni I'm bout to be in a meeting and will mull on your response before I respond back.  I'd say the average debt to income ratio for Millenials is higher then previous generations in regards to student loan debt

Given that the cost of education has been increasing at a much higher rate than inflation, I will concede this is likely true. I guess my point was that from us Gen-xers on down, there has been a continual trend of each successive generation winding up less well off than the preceding one. It's a sad contrast to the first 2 centuries of our country when it was assumed that one's children would be more successful/ have greater opportunities.

 

 

[twa]

I fully expect my kids to be better off financially than me,aside from accumulated net worth they already are

[TheGreatBuzz]

8 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I just have a problem with people defining "rich" as "I don't have to work anymore."  I define it as people who work, but can afford all of the things they want, which includes a nice house in a nice neighborhood (but not a pointlessly large mansion), a nice car (but not a Ferrari), and the ability to buy consumer goods and experiences (travel, fancy restaurants, top shelf booze) without having to worry too much about the price tags.  

Oh.  Well I'm rich af then. 

[skinsmarydu]

Since my husband passed away in December, I'm learning a lot. Due to his recent layoff from the company he built and was loyal to for 32 years combined with my illness last year, he had no health or life insurance when he passed, it was all we could do to pay for mine. I have since had to let it lapse. 

Get your **** in order. Don't wait. 

[88Comrade2000]

I would say yes but it probably depends on where you live.  If you live somewhere where the cost of living isn't that high; the million dollars goes a long way.  So, you would be rich.

If you live somewhere where the cost of living is high, then a million dollars probably isn't that much.

[China]

A million dollars doesn't go as far as it used to, it's not even close to easy to just live well:

 

This chart is the best explanation of middle-class finances you will ever see

 

Economists and financial experts have been telling us for years how great things are for U.S. workers and consumers. The stuff we buy is dirt cheap, and living standards are higher than ever. Wages are keeping pace with inflation. Inequality probably isn’t as bad as you’ve been led to believe. The stock market is booming!

 

So why, then, do so many of us feel like we can barely make ends meet?

 

A new report published by the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, offers a clear explanation for the disconnect between the economy described by economists and the one experienced by regular people. It all boils down to the startling shift illustrated in the chart below.

 

 

Lead author Oren Cass distills it as follows: “In 1985, the typical male worker could cover a family of four’s major expenditures (housing, health care, transportation, education) on 30 weeks of salary,” he wrote on Twitter last week. “By 2018 it took 53 weeks. Which is a problem, there being 52 weeks in a year.”

 

 

 

In 1985, the typical male breadwinner could cover those costs and still have 22 weeks of pay left for everything else a family wants and needs, such as food, clothing, entertainment and savings. Today, the typical salary doesn’t even cover the four basics.

 

It’s worth noting that Cass constructed his index around male earnings because men historically were more likely to be sole breadwinners. Plus, polls show that Americans still view men as the primary provider within a family, even though that’s increasingly no longer the case

 

Cass also ran the numbers for female earners, whose median wage is about 80 percent that of men. In 1985, the typical woman needed to work 45 weeks to cover the four big annual expenses; today she needs 66 weeks. That means it was easier for a female breadwinner to provide for her family in 1985 than it is for a lone male earner today.

 

Click on the link for the full article