Superficial way you judge people as rich ?

[Anonymous]

Just coming here to say the people who say classical facial features or some other such nonesense creep me out.

There is so much new money around here I just can't. The biggest indocator of old wealth is often a first name that is a last name of a wealthy family--like that Ken so so is actually a Kennedy. Also last names like Pickett or Sargent or Lodge. And not just any private schools. While people here are freaking out about Sidwell, the wealthy go to Groton or Miss Porter's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indian Americans.

They live below their means but most are rich. Even the poors have enough to pay for kids college, big fat 100K weddings, retirement, paid off home, kid's first car etc.

How do they do it?

B/c they have no retirement and expect their kids to pay for their life past 60. They aren't rich.

This is not true at all. Indian-Americans are the wealthiest ethnic group in US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

Income is not wealth. And this does not take into consideration Location. They're concentrated in HCOL cities so of course they have higher salaries plus they're far more likely to be married.

What are you trying to argue?

Yes, they are immigrants who come to America without wealth.

Yes, they are concentrated in HCOL areas and so have higher salaries. Also, mostly in high paying careers. Most likely to be married and remain married.

Yes, the first gen save to pay for kids college, weddings, help with other costs. Perhaps some money to grandkids too.

All of the above make them behave like the rich. But they certainly do not have other cultural tells of WASP rich people with generational wealth.

No, they are not dependent on their kids for their retirement. Most will have saved for retirement and live well. Multi-generational families are a cultural norm so that is not a function of poverty. They also do not have the cultural tells of WASP poor people who actually cannot afford their retirement. Living together in a multigenerational household is the way Indian Americans take care of the vulnerable generations (young and elderly). This eventually allows them to leapfrog into higher SES within a decade or two of arriving empty pocket into this country.

Most are college educated in STEM subjects. Even the SAHMs who choose to devote themselves to educating their kids.

+1

Indian-American here. Intergenerational living is such an astonishing wealth hack that I'm surprised it's not a universally-adopted practice.

Most of us can’t stand our in-laws. Mine are ok, but I can’t live with them full time.

In fairness, some modern Indian women don't like it. The wife always goes to the husband's family home and has to play second fiddle to the MIL.

Correct.
Wives complain how they have to cook for the in-laws after working long hours at their jobs.
Usually the in-laws don’t cook but expect hot home cooked meals everyday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indian Americans.

They live below their means but most are rich. Even the poors have enough to pay for kids college, big fat 100K weddings, retirement, paid off home, kid's first car etc.

How do they do it?

B/c they have no retirement and expect their kids to pay for their life past 60. They aren't rich.

This is not true at all. Indian-Americans are the wealthiest ethnic group in US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

Income is not wealth. And this does not take into consideration Location. They're concentrated in HCOL cities so of course they have higher salaries plus they're far more likely to be married.

What are you trying to argue?

Yes, they are immigrants who come to America without wealth.

Yes, they are concentrated in HCOL areas and so have higher salaries. Also, mostly in high paying careers. Most likely to be married and remain married.

Yes, the first gen save to pay for kids college, weddings, help with other costs. Perhaps some money to grandkids too.

All of the above make them behave like the rich. But they certainly do not have other cultural tells of WASP rich people with generational wealth.

No, they are not dependent on their kids for their retirement. Most will have saved for retirement and live well. Multi-generational families are a cultural norm so that is not a function of poverty. They also do not have the cultural tells of WASP poor people who actually cannot afford their retirement. Living together in a multigenerational household is the way Indian Americans take care of the vulnerable generations (young and elderly). This eventually allows them to leapfrog into higher SES within a decade or two of arriving empty pocket into this country.

Most are college educated in STEM subjects. Even the SAHMs who choose to devote themselves to educating their kids.

+1

Indian-American here. Intergenerational living is such an astonishing wealth hack that I'm surprised it's not a universally-adopted practice.

Because it comes with a price that not everyone is willing to pay. I would rather pay top notch day care center than share the kitchen with my mother in law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rugs. Rich people have expensive rugs in their houses.

Not if they have pets. I have to roll all my Persian rugs that we purchased in the Middle East (including antic rugs) after we got a puppy. The dog is 6 years old now and I am still happy with $500 synthetic rugs from Home Goods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indian Americans.

They live below their means but most are rich. Even the poors have enough to pay for kids college, big fat 100K weddings, retirement, paid off home, kid's first car etc.

How do they do it?

B/c they have no retirement and expect their kids to pay for their life past 60. They aren't rich.

This is not true at all. Indian-Americans are the wealthiest ethnic group in US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

Income is not wealth. And this does not take into consideration Location. They're concentrated in HCOL cities so of course they have higher salaries plus they're far more likely to be married.

What are you trying to argue?

Yes, they are immigrants who come to America without wealth.

Yes, they are concentrated in HCOL areas and so have higher salaries. Also, mostly in high paying careers. Most likely to be married and remain married.

Yes, the first gen save to pay for kids college, weddings, help with other costs. Perhaps some money to grandkids too.

All of the above make them behave like the rich. But they certainly do not have other cultural tells of WASP rich people with generational wealth.

No, they are not dependent on their kids for their retirement. Most will have saved for retirement and live well. Multi-generational families are a cultural norm so that is not a function of poverty. They also do not have the cultural tells of WASP poor people who actually cannot afford their retirement. Living together in a multigenerational household is the way Indian Americans take care of the vulnerable generations (young and elderly). This eventually allows them to leapfrog into higher SES within a decade or two of arriving empty pocket into this country.

Most are college educated in STEM subjects. Even the SAHMs who choose to devote themselves to educating their kids.

+1

Indian-American here. Intergenerational living is such an astonishing wealth hack that I'm surprised it's not a universally-adopted practice.

Because it comes with a price that not everyone is willing to pay. I would rather pay top notch day care center than share the kitchen with my mother in law.

+1
Nothing is free in life. Pick the poison you can live with.

[Anonymous]

Perfectly colored hair, thin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly colored hair, thin

I agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly colored hair, thin

Non-colored, natural hair.