Millionaire$~ 10 million of them

[mickeyd]

This article is a year old so I suppose that there are 10M of them by now. Read the story and learn how to join the group. Already a member of the two comma club? See how you compare to others.

Quote:

A record 9.63 million households had a net worth of $1 million or more last year, a 58 percent increase from 2008. The number of affluent households worth between $100,000 and $1 million also went up in 2013

Record Number of Millionaire Households in 2013

[braumeister]

An "affluent household" is worth over $100,000 according to that article.

Maybe my internal calculator is off, but I hardly think $100K net worth would be considered affluent in this country today. Comfortable maybe.

[Pharmmgr]

I agree with you. 100k will definitely provide plenty of cushion for any major cost or job loss. But it is far from affluent.

[GalaxyBoy]

Apparently they consider a net worth of $100k as an "affluent" household? Or more specifically, "Mass Affluent Households, with a net worth between $100,000 and $1 million, Not Including Primary Residence (NIPR)."

Whatever "mass affluent" means. The referenced report, which has been updated for 2015, costs 50 bucks and the Time article is no more than an executive summary.

BUT, the point is, the numbers of households with a net worth of this value has reached pre-recession levels. Which is good news for the households, but apparently even better news for financial advisors and brokers.

[Which Roger]

Depends on age. I would consider $100k affluent for a 30-year-old, but certainly not for someone in ER.

[ERhoosier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by braumeister An "affluent household" is worth over $100,000 according to that article. Maybe my internal calculator is off, but I hardly think $100K net worth would be considered affluent in this country today. Comfortable maybe.

+1

According to Federal Reserve (link below), median US household NW is $81k. So $100k NW is above ave, but I would not say rich (affluent).

Agree 100% with Which Roger that interpretation of NW needs to include consideration of age. According to the Fed, the bottom 25% of US HH's have a NEGATIVE mean NW. However there's a big difference between a recent college grad with student loans but a good six-figure job vs a retiree trying to scape by on just SS.

FRB: Federal Reserve Bulletin

The other thing I find very misleading about these NW surveys is that they ignore the value of future payments/services. A 55yo retired couple that just sold their life-long small business and has $500k in assets but no pension benefits looks "affluent" in the original survey. Another couple who recently retired with only $50k in "assets" but with a pension of $40k/yr plus retiree health insurance looks poor in such surveys. In reality, the latter couple has a significantly higher functional NW due to the future value of that pension/benefits package.

[Gumby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Which Roger Depends on age. I would consider $100k affluent for a 30-year-old, but certainly not for someone in ER.

Fortunately, the US Census Bureau has compiled data that shed some light on this.

http://www.census.gov/people/wealth/...0to%202011.pdf

See Table A1 on Page 7.

[Andre1969]

When they compare these numbers over the years, do they take inflation into account? For instance, they say there were 9.2M millionaire households in 2007, and 9.63M in 2013.

Well, inflation has been fairly low, but time does march on. $1M in 2013 is the equivalent of only $890K in 2007. Conversely, $1M in 2007 is the equivalent of $1,124,000 in 2013.

My guess is that they don't take inflation into account, because of the extra math involved, but I could be wrong.

I'll be curious to see the 2014 numbers, as that's where I finally joined that club. Actually, since those figures are net worth and not just investible assets, I might have joined it in 2013.

[Independent]

Let's be aware of the purpose of this survey. It is not about some gov't program, or some university research on "retirement preparedness".

It is market research. The "Spectrem Group" provides information to financial advisers. Their focus is going to be on how much money that FA can manage. Pensions, Social Security, even home equity, aren't terribly important to them. This tip-of-the-iceberg factoid is intended to tell FAs something about the size of their target market. (And, of course, suggest that Spectrem might be a good place to get more detailed information.)

About Spectrem Group

[eta2020]

I think that this is not "investable assets" but includes primary residence as well.

Millionaire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The above link indicates maybe 50% or more smaller lumber.

[eta2020]

Net worth Percentile Rank Calculator | Shnugi

This is an interesting calculator to see where you are Includes house I believe.

[Independent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gumby Fortunately, the US Census Bureau has compiled data that shed some light on this. http://www.census.gov/people/wealth/...0to%202011.pdf See Table A1 on Page 7.

Thanks. It's hard to find two-dimensional data like this.

Very roughly, this says that about 10% of families in the 65-74 range have $1 million or more, including house but excluding pensions.

We had another thread where somebody said only 8% of 65-year-olds are "wealthy" or "finincially independent". Nobody knew where that came from, maybe this fits.

[ERTX]

Then you read the stories where must Americans don't have $2K for an emergency or over half are living pay check to pay check.

The report reveals 55% of American households are “savings-limited,” meaning they can replace less than one-month of their income through their savings. Americans Are Still Struggling Paycheck-to-Paycheck, Lack Emergency Savings - MainStreet

[mpeirce]

Because of inflation, millionaire means something quite different as time goes on. I know we all pretty much know that, but the numbers are kind of interesting:

From Millionaire - Wikipedia

Historical worth

Depending on how it is calculated, a million US dollars in 1900 is equivalent to ($28.3 million in 2015).

$24,766,584.77 using the consumer price index,
$21,224,697.05 using the GDP deflator,
$114,128,571.43 using the unskilled wage,
$162,813,054.25 using the nominal GDP per capita,
$641,531,874.47 using the relative share of GDP,

Thus one would need to have almost thirty million dollars today to have the purchasing power of a US millionaire in 1900, or more than a hundred million dollars to have the same impact on the US economy.

[ERTX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpeirce Because of inflation, millionaire means something quite different as time goes on.

[eta2020]

Net worth Percentile Rank Calculator | Shnugi

It takes 4.5 Million to just enter upper 2% households. Most people here certainly can be FI unless they are pretty big spenders.

It takes about 1.1 million to enter group mentioned in OPs article. That number is far from being FI unless one is 62 year old and collects SS.

And there will be lot of people in between as far as being FI goes.

[shotgunner]

It's interesting to me that measure is "households". To get some perspective there were 121.1 million households in 2012 in the US. So a net worth of at least $1M puts a household in the top 8%. A million bucks aint what it used to be (but it is still a blessing) and the line of people who don't have that much is very long.

[Andre1969]

I always get confused by what constitutes a "household". For instance, in my case, I'm single, but have two unrelated house mates who rent from me. Would we be considered one household, or three?

If I have a NW of $1M, and the two of them have nothing, it doesn't seem right that either one of them could say "I'm in the top 8%".

[Car-Guy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shotgunner A million bucks aint what it used to be

So very true. I'm well into the multi millions club but I sure don't feel rich, wealthy or affluent.

[ChiliPepr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andre1969 I always get confused by what constitutes a "household". For instance, in my case, I'm single, but have two unrelated house mates who rent from me. Would we be considered one household, or three? If I have a NW of $1M, and the two of them have nothing, it doesn't seem right that either one of them could say "I'm in the top 8%".

A "household" is a group of people that could be on the same tax form.... basically your spouse, dependent children and/or family members.

Roommates don't count; a SO that you live with, but do not include as a dependent, doesn't count; kids that are listed as a dependent, but do not live at home do count.