|
|
U.S. millionaires say $7 million not enough to be rich
03-14-2011, 10:12 AM
|
#1
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,391
|
U.S. millionaires say $7 million not enough to be rich
Is a million or two still rich ?
Quote:
More than four out of ten American millionaires say they do not feel rich. Indeed many would need to have at least $7.5 million in order to feel they were truly rich, according to a Fidelity Investments survey
|
U.S. millionaires say $7 million not enough to be rich - Yahoo! News-
Is a million or two still rich ?
|
|
|
|
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!
Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!
|
03-14-2011, 10:17 AM
|
#2
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 334
|
Read this earlier today; I think that with the downturn in the markets people just don't feel to good about not having lots of money. I also believe that most that don't believe they are rich unless they have more than $7 million are not LBYM to start with.
Just my opinion
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 10:21 AM
|
#3
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,391
|
Well the quoted $7.5M portfolio would (using our standard 4% SWR) give an income of ~$300k/year.
That is certainly a very very nice income but perhaps not "rich".
I can see the logic of those quoted.
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 10:25 AM
|
#4
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,901
|
When I had nothing I thought $100K was "rich". When I had $100K, I thought $1M was "rich". When I had $1M, I thought $10M was "rich"...
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 10:37 AM
|
#5
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,323
|
I don't want those $7MM folks to feel deprived, so I'd be more than willing to take it off their hands for them.
__________________
Please consider adopting a rescue animal. So very many need a furr-ever home and someone to love them! And if we all spay/neuter our pets there won't be an overpopulation to put to death.
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 10:47 AM
|
#6
|
Recycles dryer sheets
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 444
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FD
When I had nothing I thought $100K was "rich". When I had $100K, I thought $1M was "rich". When I had $1M, I thought $10M was "rich"...
|
.....and ?
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 10:49 AM
|
#7
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,434
|
Actually people seem to be smarter than I would have thought when asked this question. I always consider the $1M (after tax) to be 1955 or so since it seems to have been what people then considered rich. So according to the westegg calculator: "What cost $1000000 in 1955 would cost $7922698.13 in 2009. " People's feeling that 7.5M was "rich" is not that far off for a feeling when compared to the same "feeling" in 1955.
For people too young to remember there was this TV show in the 50s where a billionaire gave $1M tax free to a person he chose. It was not a reality show, just entertainment. But people back then "felt" this was the definition of "rich".
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 10:55 AM
|
#8
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,901
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by novaman
.....and ?
|
Isn't it obvious?
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 11:04 AM
|
#9
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,227
|
You need to define "rich" before you debate a number. Is it debt-free, FI, vacation home, travel without worry, go first class, private jet, or what?
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 11:19 AM
|
#10
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,994
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadpole
Actually people seem to be smarter than I would have thought when asked this question. I always consider the $1M (after tax) to be 1955 or so since it seems to have been what people then considered rich. So according to the westegg calculator: "What cost $1000000 in 1955 would cost $7922698.13 in 2009. " People's feeling that 7.5M was "rich" is not that far off for a feeling when compared to the same "feeling" in 1955.
For people too young to remember there was this TV show in the 50s where a billionaire gave $1M tax free to a person he chose. It was not a reality show, just entertainment. But people back then "felt" this was the definition of "rich".
|
We need deflation to bring things back in line. Then those with "just" 1 million will feel more rich.!
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 12:17 PM
|
#11
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,350
|
I think $7.5M is rich. I think what FD said makes a lot of sense. It's all relative. I have a net worth of barely six-figures so $1M seem rich to me let alone $7.5M. Even at age 31, if I took $1M at 2.5% SWR that would give me more spending money than i've ever had in my life so i'd feel rich. This reminds me of the Chris Rock sketch: Rich vs wealth
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 12:41 PM
|
#12
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7,968
|
I have that mysterious amount called by Mr Bogle. Enough.
As for Chris Rock, wealth is when it's 1994 and you are sitting on the back deck over Lake Ponchartrain drinking coffee watching those folks crossing the I-10 bridge to go to work.
And you don't have to.
heh heh heh - and time to read this forum which taught me 'frugal' and LBYM were classier than 'cheap SOB.'
I felt 'rich' this morning when using two NEW dryer sheets with the laundry.
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 01:47 PM
|
#13
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,190
|
Just like to retire you need "50% more than you have", the same is true for feeling "rich": it is (for most people) 50% more than you have...
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 01:51 PM
|
#14
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,983
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LARS
Just like to retire you need "50% more than you have", the same is true for feeling "rich": it is (for most people) 50% more than you have...
|
Obviously for an American a pre-tax income of 4% of $1mm, or $40,000 is not even remotely rich. It isn't even modestly sufficient in most places and under most circumstances, unless of course you have rich cola retirement streams from public funds in addition to your $1mm.
Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 01:59 PM
|
#15
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,350
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha
Obviously for an American a pre-tax income of 4% of $1mm, or $40,000 is not even remotely rich. It isn't even modestly sufficient in most places and under most circumstances, unless of course you have rich cola retirement streams from public funds in addition to your $1mm.
Ha
|
It is modestly sufficient in most places and under most circumstances. A very large majority live on less and manage to get by. If you live in a coastal city then it may be difficult but that's not most places.
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 02:05 PM
|
#16
|
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,190
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha
Obviously for an American a pre-tax income of 4% of $1mm, or $40,000 is not even remotely rich. It isn't even modestly sufficient in most places and under most circumstances, unless of course you have rich cola retirement streams from public funds in addition to your $1mm.
Ha
|
Not at all clear how your point is relevant to mine...
Mine point was that for most people their idea of "rich" is conditioned upon always needing more, no matter how much you have. No doubt driven by comparing to the "Jones". Moreover, for most, the "rich" thing is not even an absolute value: if you have $10 million you want $20 million to feel rich. And when you get $20 million you need $40 million to feel rich, etc.
Larry Ellison considers himself poor compared to Bill Gates, etc. etc.
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 02:29 PM
|
#17
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 17,774
|
The article is based on a Fidelity survey of 1,000 people who have at least $1 million in investable assets, not including any real estate OR retirement accounts. Some of them could have mortgages of more than $1 million, so I can see why those people would think they need a lot more money. On the other hand, who knows what the upper limit on retirement accounts might be, but if one's nest egg is mostly tied up in those rather than the non-retirement investable assets, then I can see why that group would also think they need a lot more money to call themselves rich today.
It might be more interesting to see the Fidelity study on what this group would consider poor.
__________________
“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 02:42 PM
|
#18
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronc879
It is modestly sufficient in most places and under most circumstances. A very large majority live on less and manage to get by. If you live in a coastal city then it may be difficult but that's not most places.
|
"Modestly sufficient" does not equal "rich." At least not the way I use the word in my vocabulary.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 02:49 PM
|
#19
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,350
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet
"Modestly sufficient" does not equal "rich." At least not the way I use the word in my vocabulary.
|
I agree. I was using "modestly sufficient" in response to a post by Haha.
|
|
|
03-14-2011, 02:49 PM
|
#20
|
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha
Obviously for an American a pre-tax income of 4% of $1mm, or $40,000 is not even remotely rich. It isn't even modestly sufficient in most places and under most circumstances, unless of course you have rich cola retirement streams from public funds in addition to your $1mm.
Ha
|
Exactly.
While DW and I could get by on $40k, there is no way I could consider myself "rich" in the way I define the term. At $40k we'd be living modestly with little/no travel or entertainment expense and with a 5% chance or so we'd run out of money before death. Hardly what I'd call "rich."
In Chicago, by the time you purchased health insurance or paid for your Medicare and paid your taxes, it would be a challenge to comfortably pay for food, clothing and shelter.
I know many will chime in and add other assets and income sources such as a paid-for house, a paid-for car, free medical insurance, SS or some other pension. But, if you have those things, then you have more than the mentioned one million bux.
I would have never RE'd on a FIRE portfolio of one million without other assets or income. Way, way too much risk that expenses will uncontrollably rise above $40k and you'll wind up living in a box under a bridge in your 80's.
Edit: Although we're arm wrestling over being "rich" with one million bux, the article referred to 7 mil. Now, that's a different story. With a net worth of 7 mil, I imagine I'd feel rich. On an annual budget of a quarter mil or so, we'd have a nice home, nice cars and could afford a significant amount of travel and entertainment without worry. For me, that would inch me over the line into "rich." Although Bill and Melinda certainly wouldn't be seeking us out as social chums I'm sure!
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
» Quick Links
|
|
|