Do you consider a net worth of 2.5 million "rich?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread clearly shows that most people think $2.5 million is rich and set for life.

Most people could happily live the rest of their lives with this. Especially if they are willing to move. Working is optional, not required.

Some people say this is not enough. Those people probably want expensive homes, private school, luxury vacations, etc. etc.

So the final answer is that this is rich for most people, but not all.

See that's really the rub. Most of the people who think this is rich don't actually have that kind of money. If they did, they would either run through it and be poor again (see below link re lottery winners), or, if they are smart, they would come to the realization that $2.5M is not really rich.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/17/18323470-what-could-happen-to-you-tales-of-big-lottery-winners

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. All your comments have been so interesting. I don't consider myself a shrewd real estate investor- it is true that we just got lucky. My point remains that while 2.5 million is a lot of money (regardless of how we acquired it), we live a middle class lifestyle. Ie: older cars, use coupons, shop at target and buy things on sale/clearance, minimal eating old, use hand-me-downs, 1 modest vacation/year, kids in public schools, the list goes on.

I'm not saying we don't have more money saved than others here, but our lifestyle is middle class. We will keep working until our youngest is done with college. So we're not living much differently than most people.

OP, this is getting so old. Can't you realize that it doesn't matter how you choose to live - it's that you HAVE THE CHOICE to live the way you choose. You have a safety net. A big safety net! That's being rich. I personally don't define rich as not having to work - I define it as not having to worry. And you clearly don't have to worry. You could take your millions, move to an area with a much lower cost of living - and live comfortably for the rest of your (and your kids') lives. Many of us don't have the option of doing that - but again, being rich isn't relative - it doesn't matter what "many of us" have or don't have to define your level of richness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I cannot bring myself to read these pages and pages of postings on the frivolous question of whether a net worth of $2,500,000 makes you rich.

The answer, OP, to either your humble brag or clueless inquiry is "yes". You are wealthy, wealthier in fact, than most every other person in this country and certainly in this world. If someone were to submit this thread to the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, or the Louisville Courier-Journal, the readers of those papers would probably be dismayed to know that the citizens of our capital, on whose shoulders so many important decisions, legislation, and policy-making rests, live in such a bubble of comfort and affluent competitiveness, so out of touch with most people.

I will share this story so that you can appreciate your wealth even more. Several months ago, I attended my volunteer day at an organization that provides the very poorest children in our surrounding communities with essentials for home and school, socks and underwear, soap and shampoo, hairbrushes and toothbrushes, books and backpacks, uniforms and coats. One little 3d grade girl put on her jumper and twirled around in delight as she told us "my mother will be so happy, she always wanted me to have one of these but we could not buy it." Another 2d or 3d grade child, a severely handicapped-at-birth girl who was partially blind, wore hearing aids, walked with crutches, and could speak very little, broke into applause and an enormous smile when we fitted her with a brand new, white polo shirt. It is very humbling and completely emotional when someone to whom the world has given so little, and who fate has dealt such a very difficult hand, is so appreciative of a little thing like a new shirt.

I agree that this thread is very out of touch, no wonder people refer to this area as living in the bubble. I can read the paper headline now: Washingtonians Disappear, Likely Absorbed by Themselves

LOL!!

Double Word to both posts. Your richness is not defined by what you don't have; it is defined by what you do have. And OP has a lot. This insistence that there are super billionaires out there, therefore, you are not rich, is tone deaf. And disingenuous.

Our HHI is 300K. We have some investments, though not in the millions. We are in the top 5% of local incomes. I feel pretty rich because 1. I have savings (retirement and college) 2. healthcare 3. Luxuries (not the Hope Diamond, but nice things) 4. I never have to worry about how my bills will be paid.

How I may be able to live in the future is not relevant to the now. For now, I am rich.

Sorry that's middle class

Rich means you can buy above and beyond, don't shop at the normal stores (think Tysons 2, whole foods only,) have staff that does your cleaning, cooking, driving, shopping etc...

And this is based on... what? Why is that particular criteria relevant? Not to mention, most of the rich people here who could in fact afford all the above are not going to do it, and will then insist that they are not rich, because they shop at Target despite having millions on bank accounts. Lifestyle is a choice, and is largely irrelevant to whether one is rich - but wealth isn't.

For some reason you want to save the label 'rich' for 0.001% but that's crazy and useless, as everyone else, ranging from living from paycheck to paycheck to people with millions in savings is big undifferentiated blob of "middle class".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Sorry that's middle class

Rich means you can buy above and beyond, don't shop at the normal stores (think Tysons 2, whole foods only,) have staff that does your cleaning, cooking, driving, shopping etc..'

And that's the problem we have here. People have a truly distorted version of what it means to be middle class. True financial security with luxuries and savings is NOT middle class.

Y'all need to stop watching the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. Those kinds of incomes are outliers. The top 1% of the top 1% is irrelevant.

If you make in the top 5% of income, you are rich. Sorry. Get this through your heads:Some people having more than you does not make you not rich, just as some people people making less than 10,000 a year does not make the 10K earners not poor.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. All your comments have been so interesting. I don't consider myself a shrewd real estate investor- it is true that we just got lucky. My point remains that while 2.5 million is a lot of money (regardless of how we acquired it), we live a middle class lifestyle. Ie: older cars, use coupons, shop at target and buy things on sale/clearance, minimal eating old, use hand-me-downs, 1 modest vacation/year, kids in public schools, the list goes on.

I'm not saying we don't have more money saved than others here, but our lifestyle is middle class. We will keep working until our youngest is done with college. So we're not living much differently than most people.

OP, this is getting so old. Can't you realize that it doesn't matter how you choose to live - it's that you HAVE THE CHOICE to live the way you choose. You have a safety net. A big safety net! That's being rich. I personally don't define rich as not having to work - I define it as not having to worry. And you clearly don't have to worry. You could take your millions, move to an area with a much lower cost of living - and live comfortably for the rest of your (and your kids') lives. Many of us don't have the option of doing that - but again, being rich isn't relative - it doesn't matter what "many of us" have or don't have to define your level of richness.

Exactly! OP and others are essentially saying that even if she had billions in savings, if she still used hand me downs, she wouldn't be rich. I mean, seriously!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread clearly shows that most people think $2.5 million is rich and set for life.

Most people could happily live the rest of their lives with this. Especially if they are willing to move. Working is optional, not required.

Some people say this is not enough. Those people probably want expensive homes, private school, luxury vacations, etc. etc.

So the final answer is that this is rich for most people, but not all.

See that's really the rub. Most of the people who think this is rich don't actually have that kind of money. If they did, they would either run through it and be poor again (see below link re lottery winners), or, if they are smart, they would come to the realization that $2.5M is not really rich.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/17/18323470-what-could-happen-to-you-tales-of-big-lottery-winners

This depends on your use of "smart." If you mean "behaving or talking in a rude or impolite way: showing a lack of respect for someone", then I would agree, the rude person would insist that they, with 2.5 million + house are not rich.

If, however, you meant smart as in "very good at learning or thinking about things: showing intelligence or good judgement" I believe you are wrong. In this scenario the smart person would realize that they were in fact rich, fortunate, and that if they didn't want to work again they didn't have to.

We are in one of the most affluent, educated, employed areas in the country. Fairfax county's median household income is 107k. That means that it would take the average family 25 working years to make that 2.5 million. Not to save it, just make it. Before taxes, childcare, food, utilities. The National median income is 52k (per census.gov for 2007-2011). So that is 50 years of their income. How is that anything other than rich? How can it be middle class if you have more money than the median household in the us will MAKE in 50 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread clearly shows that most people think $2.5 million is rich and set for life.

Most people could happily live the rest of their lives with this. Especially if they are willing to move. Working is optional, not required.

Some people say this is not enough. Those people probably want expensive homes, private school, luxury vacations, etc. etc.

So the final answer is that this is rich for most people, but not all.

See that's really the rub. Most of the people who think this is rich don't actually have that kind of money. If they did, they would either run through it and be poor again (see below link re lottery winners), or, if they are smart, they would come to the realization that $2.5M is not really rich.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/17/18323470-what-could-happen-to-you-tales-of-big-lottery-winners

You might be rich, but you are dumb. You are essentially saying that labeling oneself 'rich' leads to reckless spending. Perhaps that's some crutch you have that helps you control your spending impulses. This, however, has nothing to do with actually being rich. Those lottery winners were in fact rich at some point in their lives. The fact that they squandered it doesn't detract from that fact.

[Anonymous]

Can't believe this is running to 12 pages already.

OP, the answer to your original question is "yes." Happy Thanksgiving!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can't believe this is running to 12 pages already.

OP, the answer to your original question is "yes." Happy Thanksgiving!

wrong

It's 5 million
"Fully 60 percent of those worth $5 million or more said they're wealthy, while only 28 percent of those worth $1 million to $5 million said they were wealthy (those were the only two categories given)."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100904381

With 450k HHI
http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/31/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-rich/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't believe this is running to 12 pages already.

OP, the answer to your original question is "yes." Happy Thanksgiving!

wrong

It's 5 million
"Fully 60 percent of those worth $5 million or more said they're wealthy, while only 28 percent of those worth $1 million to $5 million said they were wealthy (those were the only two categories given)."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100904381

With 450k HHI
http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/31/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-rich/

That's what THEY think. According to the Subject line, OP wanted to know what *I* think. And since s/he is asking, the answer is "yes."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't believe this is running to 12 pages already.

OP, the answer to your original question is "yes." Happy Thanksgiving!

wrong

It's 5 million
"Fully 60 percent of those worth $5 million or more said they're wealthy, while only 28 percent of those worth $1 million to $5 million said they were wealthy (those were the only two categories given)."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100904381

With 450k HHI
http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/31/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-rich/

That's what THEY think. According to the Subject line, OP wanted to know what *I* think. And since s/he is asking, the answer is "yes."

Telling someone that they are rich doesn't make them rich, it's how you feel and how comfortable you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread clearly shows that most people think $2.5 million is rich and set for life.

Most people could happily live the rest of their lives with this. Especially if they are willing to move. Working is optional, not required.

Some people say this is not enough. Those people probably want expensive homes, private school, luxury vacations, etc. etc.

So the final answer is that this is rich for most people, but not all.

You are not set for life with $2.5M in this area, unless you live very frugally. Which can be difficult as having that much in the bank is awfully tempting...

You could be set for life if you moved somewhere cheaper. But family, job, friends are here and we have been here a long time. Not ready to retire yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't believe this is running to 12 pages already.

OP, the answer to your original question is "yes." Happy Thanksgiving!

wrong

It's 5 million
"Fully 60 percent of those worth $5 million or more said they're wealthy, while only 28 percent of those worth $1 million to $5 million said they were wealthy (those were the only two categories given)."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100904381

With 450k HHI
http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/31/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-rich/

But this is a survey of rich people (as seen by others). it's no secret by now that many of them think they are not rich, but the rest of the population does. Rich do not get to define the meaning of words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't believe this is running to 12 pages already.

OP, the answer to your original question is "yes." Happy Thanksgiving!

wrong

It's 5 million
"Fully 60 percent of those worth $5 million or more said they're wealthy, while only 28 percent of those worth $1 million to $5 million said they were wealthy (those were the only two categories given)."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100904381

With 450k HHI
http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/31/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-rich/

That's what THEY think. According to the Subject line, OP wanted to know what *I* think. And since s/he is asking, the answer is "yes."

Telling someone that they are rich doesn't make them rich, it's how you feel and how comfortable you are.

Telling something certainly doesn't make it true, but If most people think you are rich, then you are rich. How you feel about it is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this thread clearly shows that most people think $2.5 million is rich and set for life.

Most people could happily live the rest of their lives with this. Especially if they are willing to move. Working is optional, not required.

Some people say this is not enough. Those people probably want expensive homes, private school, luxury vacations, etc. etc.

So the final answer is that this is rich for most people, but not all.

See that's really the rub. Most of the people who think this is rich don't actually have that kind of money. If they did, they would either run through it and be poor again (see below link re lottery winners), or, if they are smart, they would come to the realization that $2.5M is not really rich.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/17/18323470-what-could-happen-to-you-tales-of-big-lottery-winners

Even if true - so what? That wouldnt mean they were not rich in the first place.

The bottom line is, a person with a lot of money (ie rich) can choose to 1) keep working, live frugally 2) spend money on extravagant luxuries 3) retire 4) give money away to family, friends, charity.. 5) invest hoping to make even more... Etc etc. Some of these choices would lead the person making them to become richer, some poorer (or even flat poor), quickly or slowly.... But all these people are, regardless od they decide to do, at this point, rich.