Who counts as Rich?

[rescueme]

Bernie Madoff followed his bliss...so there may be exceptions.

I'm not Bernie ...

However, I don't necessarily with those that chose to live "less than they can" just because they think that they owe something to "the masses".

Heck, we've saved/invested over our lifetime for ourselves, and the benefit of our (disabled) son, after our passing.

So we spend the "excess" now to have a good life, for the remainder of our years? And anything left over? It will go to our named charities.

Sorry, we have no regrets on our decision...

 

[WestLake]

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

 

[Huston55]

You'll have to admit that Clifp must be pretty cool to snag a 5'9" 120 # woman. Just walking down the street with her will improve his reputation in his 'hood, especially if she will take his arm and then lean over and kiss his cheek. I have good looking gf. I ask her to wear heels when she comes around, she improves my standing with my neighbors. I tried to get her to moan a little louder toward the same effect, but she said I don't rate that. It's even getting harder to get her to wear heels. She says she can't wear heels if I insist on taking buses instead of driving because the walking is too hard.

Ha

Back to the theme of the OP, I'd say both of these make you rich, especially if "rich" is measured in part, as noted in earlier posts, by envy.

 

[W2R]

I'm not Bernie ...

You're not? Oh darn, there goes that hypothesis. (just kidding!)

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

Not at all. I think on one of the other threads, it was pointed out that truly rich people tend to drive Ford F-150's instead of luxury cars.

 

[Midpack]

However, I don't necessarily with those that chose to live "less than they can" just because they think that they owe something to "the masses".

We've lived below our means and will continue to do so for the independence it provides. We'd rather have options than things, 'the most important things in life aren't things' and I think that was largely Thoreau's POV. Owing to "the masses" has nothing whatsoever to do with it, I would guess that reason would be low on most people's lists, but maybe I'm mistaken.

 

[pletal]

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

No, you are not alone, I also am finding after finally having the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want them. I can now afford my dream car, a Lamborghini Gallardo but could live off the money for four years. Being FI should mean you can afford time to do what you want. Buying stuff just keeps you on the merry-go-round a little longer.

The song that really moves me is "watching the wheels" by John Lennon.

 

[W2R]

We've lived below our means and will continue to do so for the independence it provides. We'd rather have options than things, 'the most important things in life aren't things' and I think Tha was largely Thoreau's POV. Owing to "the masses" has nothing whatsoever to do with it, I would guess that reason would be low on most people's lists, but maybe I'm mistaken.

Hyper-consumerist cravings can badly damage or destroy the peace, freedom, and satisfaction in life for some people. It can also take up one's free time, in caring for all those possessions.

A simple life that doesn't have to involve any feelings of deprivation or lack. Sometimes a simple/minimalist life can be much more full and satisfying than otherwise. Sometimes people leading such a life take advantage of the lack of complexity obscuring one's thinking, in order to be able to see what is truly important to them in life or to come to other philosophically meaningful realizations.

But then, RescueMe is also right that he has every right to get as much enjoyment out of his money as he wishes. Honestly there is no particular virtue in either spending money or in minimalism. These are just different ways of living, and luckily nobody is telling us that we must spend more, or less, than we feel is right for us.

 

[obgyn65]

No, you are not alone. I have been guilty of this too.

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

 

[Meadbh]

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

Not alone at all! I have changed my mind about many of the things I thought I wanted. Now I look critically at the opportunity cost of luxuries and status symbols. For example, I would happily trade a luxury car for the time it would take to earn what it costs.

 

[Midpack]

Hyper-consumerist cravings can badly damage or destroy the peace, freedom, and satisfaction in life for some people. It can also take up one's free time, in caring for all those possessions.

A simple life that doesn't have to involve any feelings of deprivation or lack. Sometimes a simple/minimalist life can be much more full and satisfying than otherwise. Sometimes people leading such a life take advantage of the lack of complexity obscuring one's thinking, in order to be able to see what is truly important to them in life or to come to other philosophically meaningful realizations.

But then, RescueMe is also right that he has every right to get as much enjoyment out of his money as he wishes. Honestly there is no particular virtue in either spending money or in minimalism. These are just different ways of living, and luckily nobody is telling us that we must spend more, or less, than we feel is right for us.

Agreed, well said...

 

[Midpack]

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

You're not alone. I have found in my old age that having the means to have whatever I want (within reason) is more satisfying than having most "things." I am more willing to spend some on life experiences, but less and less on things.

Our culture has gotten really carried away with things, but not everyone by any means. And this recession seems to have many people reconsidering what's important, IMO that's a good thing no matter what each person ultimately concludes. I am guessing that materialism will suffer a little, but there probably won't be a landslide in that direction (yet).

 

[Surewhitey]

We grew up poor white trash.. Now we are rich white trash... Living in playa del carmen!

 

[jdw_fire]

Your point is well stated and taken. What I was saying is that (with the possible exception of the under-bridge dwellers AND the uber-wealthy) all these are degrees of "more" or "better" - not "none" or "exclusive" in the USA. Lots of places in the world, only the wealthy (where everyone else is "poor") have any right to all these things. That's why it's difficult to define wealthy in the USA. Few of us are excluded from any of these things based on our wealth. However, your list could probably be used as a definition of "rich" in the USA.

I agree and also point that there is rapidly diminishing benefit to higher priced "better" products. A $400-500 37" TV is not that much worse a viewing experience than $2K 60" TV, same thing with $400 computer vs $2K, a 20K Hyundai vs a $100K Mercedes, or flying coach vs 1st class, $10 vs $50 wine. The quality of most low end goods is pretty remarkable now days.

I'd argue that most of the status symbols, Rolls Royce, Rolex, $5000 50 year old wines, are actually worse than the top end of the luxury brands. For example I bet Lexus and Mercedes are actually better cars than a Rolls.

Finally, I'd argue that increasing importance of virtual goods is a great leveler. A poor kid with a used laptop and free wifi connection has the same access to all of the free information on internet, that I or Bill Gates has. Since young people by and large are pretty cavalier about paying for digital goods, this kid has the same access to books, games, movies, as a rich person. Gates and my money only buy the minor feeling of moral superiority of purchasing a digital object instead of stealing it.

i think the simplest explanation is that almost everyone in the USA is rich and thus has access to those things that only the rich in other countries have access to. world wide wealth and income stats support this explanation and therefore i think it is also the most correct explanation.

 

[traineeinvestor]

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

The real price of additional toys is measured in years spent in the workforce, not dollars.

A couple of years of my life for [toy of choice] is too expensive for me.

 

[Huston55]

The real price of additional toys is measured in years spent in the workforce, not dollars.

A couple of years of my life for [toy of choice] is too expensive for me.

Yep, straight out of Joe D'S mouth.

 

[ejman]

Rich is when you can hire servants for cooking, cleaning, organizing, watching kids, etc. and it's not a stretch (e.g. upper middle class people have nannies, and it's often a significant expense for them).

Amethyst

Interesting viewpoint. A lot of people in many third world countries would qualify as "rich" by this definition. It is quite common for folks that would be no more than middle class (at best) here in the US to have maids, drivers, gardeners etc

 

[rescueme]

Here's one way to look at it :

 

[emi guy]

it all depends. There's a lot written about what people think is rich.
Few folks who drives mercedes are actually millionaires. (According to an article I read).

I just needed to jump in cause this hit a nerve, sort of. DW and I just recently sold our first (and probably last) Mercedes. It was an amazing experience driving the car not due to the car's fine workmanship and quality, which was great, but due to the insane stereotype that (unbeknown to us) comes with the car. Our C-280 was a 2006, used, low mileage car that cost much, much less than even an entry level compact car would if bought new. Yet, every person we know had a flip comment about being rich etc.. It became very uncomfortable, so much so that we eventually sold it. Nobody notices when their neighbor buys a new Ford Focus but if he comes home with a used European car, he's rich. Sometimes older, high quality items that last a long time are actually the more frugal way to spend money. I remember a quote that a poor nun, who was running a non-profit, once made to Dr. W. Edwards Deming: "Our school is so poor we can only afford the very best". Thanks for letting me vent.

 

[Midpack]

BTW, if we establish a way to delineate who's rich and who's not, what exactly does that do for us?

 

[Bestwifeever]

Interesting viewpoint. A lot of people in many third world countries would qualify as "rich" by this definition. It is quite common for folks that would be no more than middle class (at best) here in the US to have maids, drivers, gardeners etc

People with maids, drivers, gardeners, etc., are the rich people in third world countries.

 

[Hamlet]

Not a whole lot.

I think one important thing to understand is that there are really more classes of "rich" developing now that we have such vast wealth accumulating at the top end.

There's rich like me , rich like my boss, rich like my boss's boss, rich like a CEO, rich like a hedge fund manager (who flipped the coin correctly), and rich like Buffett and Gates.

The poor have pretty much stayed the same, and the way things are going most of the current middle class will be joining them.

The middle class is in the process of going away.

BTW, if we establish a way to delineate who's rich and who's not, what exactly does that do for us?

 

[james7]

Am I alone in finding that once I acquired the means to purchase some of the things I have desired I no longer want to do so?

I am with you there. We, and millions of others have "arrived". Many "wants" become unnecessary when you can afford them.

 

[Koolau]

BTW, if we establish a way to delineate who's rich and who's not, what exactly does that do for us?

It will help us in tax planning. It's pretty clear that the "rich" (whoever they turn out to be) will have a big bulls eye painted on their foreheads (or, maybe it will be their backsides) come future April 15th's. If we wake up some fine morning and see said bulls eye in the shaving/makeup mirror (or DW or DH suggests we look at our butts in the full length mirror as we're stepping out of the shower) we'll know it's time to hire Bombastic Bushkin as our tax guy.

Any more silly questions?