CNN Article on Wealth

[freedomatlast]

To me it's interesting to understand other people's perspective on what wealth is.

What 'wealth' means to women - Sep. 6, 2017

From the article:

"Women prefer security to material wealth or luxury. When asked which they'd prefer, never having to worry about money in the future or being able to buy whatever they want right now, 84% of women said they'd prefer peace of mind in the future, compared to 78% of men.
On average, the women surveyed said they'd consider around $2.4 million the number required to be considered "wealthy." That's nearly 30 times the net worth of U.S. households.
Of the 1,000 people Schwab surveyed, 27% defined wealth as reaching a specific savings goal. Of those, women chose a slightly higher amount than men. But the difference between estimates from men and women wasn't huge: men picked closer to $2.38 million, women picked closer to $2.39 million."

 

[walkinwood]

The authors are stretching to find differences between men and women on this subject

They also prefer security to material wealth or luxury. When asked which they'd prefer, never having to worry about money in the future or being able to buy whatever they want right now, 84% of women said they'd prefer peace of mind in the future, compared to 78% of men.

84% v/s 78% - that's like the [-]ridiculous [/-] hilarious debates we have here about the exact SWR.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

To me it's interesting to understand other people's perspective on what wealth is.

What 'wealth' means to women - Sep. 6, 2017

From the article:

"Women prefer security to material wealth or luxury. When asked which they'd prefer, never having to worry about money in the future or being able to buy whatever they want right now, 84% of women said they'd prefer peace of mind in the future, compared to 78% of men.
On average, the women surveyed said they'd consider around $2.4 million the number required to be considered "wealthy." That's nearly 30 times the net worth of U.S. households.
Of the 1,000 people Schwab surveyed, 27% defined wealth as reaching a specific savings goal. Of those, women chose a slightly higher amount than men. But the difference between estimates from men and women wasn't huge: men picked closer to $2.38 million, women picked closer to $2.39 million."

Interesting article. Were they asking woman that worked in the grocery store? Or woman that had husbands for Doctors.? Im assuming the later. They should have rang a few doorbells in my old neighborhood. The Avon lady still came to our place, definately not Charles Schwab and company.

 

[misshathaway]

Interesting article. Were they asking woman that worked in the grocery store? Or woman that had husbands for Doctors.? Im assuming the later. They should have rang a few doorbells in my old neighborhood. The Avon lady still came to our place, definately not Charles Schwab and company.

Yeah, if you asked the average person on the street I bet they would say 1 million.

 

[LRDave]

Sample size was 1000 and was supposed to span "all demographics" - for instance 275 boomers out of the 1000. I agree the number is high and the sampling technique likely selected something other than "representative across all demographics".


This is not scholarly research and more a sales tool for Schwab (says captain obvious....)

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

Yeah, if you asked the average person on the street I bet they would say 1 million.

+1

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

Sample size was 1000 and was supposed to span "all demographics" - for instance 275 boomers out of the 1000. I agree the number is high and the sampling technique likely selected something other than "representative across all demographics".


This is not scholarly research and more a sales tool for Schwab (says captain obvious....)

Ahh, this makes sense , a sales tool +1

 

[ChiliPepr]

From the article:

"When asked which they'd prefer, never having to worry about money in the future or being able to buy whatever they want right now, 84% of women said they'd prefer peace of mind in the future, compared to 78% of men."

If I could buy whatever I want right now, I would buy an annuity that gives off several million dollars a year....

 

[GravitySucks]

84% of women said they'd prefer peace of mind in the future, compared to 78% of men.
."

Key word here is Said.
In real life most women I know, like most men I know, spend instead of save.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

If I could buy whatever I want right now, I would buy an annuity that gives off several million dollars a year....

Hahahah

 

[Amethyst]

LOL...That is like the classic answer to "What if a genie appeared and granted you one wish?" "I'd wish for unlimited wishes!" I've been locked and loaded for that genie since I was 8....

If I could buy whatever I want right now, I would buy an annuity that gives off several million dollars a year....

 

[Car-Guy]

If I could buy whatever I want right now, I would buy an annuity that gives off several million dollars a year....

Easy to do. Example, if you want 3m a year for 5 years, just pay 16m up front.

 

[dunkelblau]

"In our society, there's some peg that you're a millionaire, you're in the 2%" -- is that closer to ~10%?

From the Schwab PR: "Locals say it takes $3.2 million to be considered wealthy in NYC. About half (48 percent) say they are already millionaires or believe they can reach that level, while the other half (52 percent) say they don’t have any hope."

I think their "key national findings" showed something much more substantive than the gender differences described in the CNN story: the kids are alright! RIP Keith

 

[FI_RElater]

3.2 M in NYC- "wealthy " : nah, "comfortable " maybe

Over 2 M in LCOL area: comfortable, but not wealthy
(Yeh , we're "comfortable ")

Over 10 M-- now you're talking

 

[gerntz]

If you can imagine buying anything you want now, by definition to me you wouldn't need to worry about money in the future. Same things as I see it.

 

[RobLJ]

The authors are stretching to find differences between men and women on this subject

84% v/s 78% - that's like the [-]ridiculous [/-] hilarious debates we have here about the exact SWR.

Everyone knows the right SWR is 3.28596%.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

3.2 M in NYC- "wealthy " : nah, "comfortable " maybe

Over 2 M in LCOL area: comfortable, but not wealthy
(Yeh , we're "comfortable ")

Over 10 M-- now you're talking

+1 Im with you on all 3 points.

 

[Clone]

We can discuss what the number will be, but we will never agree on what should be included in that number, or how to calculate those elements.

The typical bandits:

How do we value Pensions? (With or without COLA)
How do we value Social Security? (And then of course, when should we take it?)
How do we value health care that is paid for by a previous employer?
How do we value large assets, that may be illiquid? (Homes, businesses, farm land, artwork)

And then- What do you use for expected lifespan, future market returns, inflation, changes in the tax landscape, changes in the healthcare landscape, etc.

 

[Curmudgeon]

3.2 M in NYC- "wealthy " : nah, "comfortable " maybe

Over 2 M in LCOL area: comfortable, but not wealthy
(Yeh , we're "comfortable ")

Over 10 M-- now you're talking

Depends on age too, right?

If you're 18 and have $1M, you're rich. If you're 65 and have $1m, you have just barely enough to retire on...

 

[LOL!]

If you liked that article, then there is this one today in the NYTimes about "the rich" and just mostly about women in NY who might be considered rich and what they spend their money on:

What the Rich Won't Tell You

Not covered in the article is that the rich wipe their butts just like the rest of us.

 

[Car-Guy]

Depends on age too, right?

If you're 18 and have $1M, you're rich. If you're 65 and have $1m, you have just barely enough to retire on...

And if you were 99, you'd probably be considered rich too.

Tough to be 65 with only 1m.

 

[Koolau]

Not covered in the article is that the rich wipe their butts just like the rest of us.

Nope! That's how you know they're rich - they hire such things done for them.

 

[MooreBonds]

Interesting article. Were they asking woman that worked in the grocery store? Or woman that had husbands for Doctors.? Im assuming the later. .

Hmmm...if they had husbands for doctors, perhaps they have bigger issues to worry about?

In all seriousness, it's more deadline journalism with a little bit of clickbait, and maybe a dash of class envy - if you were to truly add up "net worth" including all pensions, the average household networth would grow MUCH larger. Hell, just adding in SS alone is a huge nut (why do you think the SS trust fund is measured in trillions of dollars, and even that isn't enough to payout what is owed). Include pensions and annuities that many households have and it's quite a bit more.

And I agree - with results of 84% vs 78%, what is the sample size (among other variables to control for).

 

[brucethebroker]

We can discuss what the number will be, but we will never agree on what should be included in that number, or how to calculate those elements.

The typical bandits:

How do we value Pensions? (With or without COLA)
How do we value Social Security? (And then of course, when should we take it?)
How do we value health care that is paid for by a previous employer?
How do we value large assets, that may be illiquid? (Homes, businesses, farm land, artwork)

And then- What do you use for expected lifespan, future market returns, inflation, changes in the tax landscape, changes in the healthcare landscape, etc.

what about the value of my Beanie baby collection

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

If you liked that article, then there is this one today in the NYTimes about "the rich" and just mostly about women in NY who might be considered rich and what they spend their money on:

What the Rich Won't Tell You

Not covered in the article is that the rich wipe their butts just like the rest of us.

I just read the article LOL! posted. Here is my take on it. She removes the price on their $6 dollar bread , NOT because of the social inequality she feels her "Latina immigrant" nanny might feel, she removed it because she is cheap and worried the nanny might want a raise, real piece of work she is. I worked for super rich people, most of them were gems. The one in the article is a greedy peasant, who i suspect is a liar, they dont go to the stores to buy bread, they send the help to do it.