pb4uski
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
+1 but only 30 years. Ashamed to say it never crossed my mind to think of it individually. I like joint better - the numbers are bigger and better.
When calculating worth do you look at combined or individual total assets?
- Thread starter 01drummer
- Start date
+1 but only 30 years. Ashamed to say it never crossed my mind to think of it individually. I like joint better - the numbers are bigger and better.
I calculate separately. Married 19 years ...we have a blended family with children on both sides....which has it's financial challenges. Our youngest children were young (4 and 5) when we married. Plus we have a post marital agreement ( there were reasons!)
Periodically I'll mentally add his number to the "number" but not routinely.
Periodically I'll mentally add his number to the "number" but not routinely.
donheff
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
+1 Not that I have a prenup now - when we got married I had no assets; DW should have demanded the prenup.
But, if DW died I wouldn't even think about remarrying without a prenup. We have our assets separated for estate purposes and they go into trusts after death. Not only do the trusts provide some protection from the surviving spouse giving it away, they make sure the inheritance stays with our kids if their spouse divorce them (the so called "bimbo" clause). Even with all that I suspect a good divorce lawyer can still shake things up.
rescueme
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
No problem - at least with meI just realized I am guilty of a thread hijack. Sorry about that, folks.
...Often when we speak of the past, and that "past" was non-traditional in nature (i.e. not the norm) we let our "past injustices" be reflected in our postings.
Heck, today is another "Hallmark Holiday" (Father's Day) - which is a "laugh" in my view. My father? A real POS (long story, that won't be spoken here). In addition to him, his wife (my mother) was an "enabler" that allowed him to get away with stuff that most folks would find highly abnormal, and suffered from a condition of "egocentrism" in which others (e.g. his family members) needed to support him in his every want/need. And if not? He would beat them into submission.
I understand that the past will haunt you - quite possibly till the end of life.
Call us "survivors"
...We started 20+ years ago with very little except the equity I had in an apartment, which was our down payment on our first home. Everything since then has been shared and our net worth is also. BTW, I've always wondered if you can call a couple a millionaire if they only have one million between two people?!
It drives Wells Fargo mad when we call up and ask about each others accounts, although we have power of attorney on each other. They seem to think we should keep it separate!
It drives Wells Fargo mad when we call up and ask about each others accounts, although we have power of attorney on each other. They seem to think we should keep it separate!
Jay_Gatsby
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,719
I don't think you can call a couple "a" millionaire just because they have a million between them in today's day and age. Women work and contribute substantially to the marital household, even if they work part time to take care of the kids. As such, a million dollars for a married couple with kids (who may be out of the house) isn't that much these days.
If the couple keeps joint accounts, they are millionaires. In many if not most of the world, family wealth has historically been used to measure economic status. We plan on our money being passed to our child and grandchild and if they steward their family wealth, on and on. Depending on where and how you go, a million IS a lot of money. I think the Japanese have a good way of thinking across generations.
Jay_Gatsby
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,719
Not disagreeing with you on the concept of family wealth. However, when you look at things objectively, each spouse only has $500k individually. This isn't very much if they're each 60+ years old and looking to retire. If they also have a mortgage-free house worth $400-$600k and plan on downsizing, then they're approaching a better number. Naturally, this doesn't include very low-cost-of-living areas, 3rd world countries, etc...
A glass half full or half empty? A million doesn't buy as much as it once did, but for a LBYM who lives in or is willing to relocate to a moderate to low cost area, it offers basic but solid security. For myself, I don't think of home worth as part of wealth.
I see properties in expensive areas that sell for half a million and shake my head in amazement. I live in Iowa, a mid to low cost area. A million here is more than enough. I still work anyway. Oops, w**k is what I meant to say.
I see properties in expensive areas that sell for half a million and shake my head in amazement. I live in Iowa, a mid to low cost area. A million here is more than enough. I still work anyway. Oops, w**k is what I meant to say.
This is also the way we operate. Except DW does not give a flip about NW or finance in general.
calmloki
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
We are Borg.
they are millionaires because they have a NW of greater than or equal to a million dollars. is doesnt matter how much (or little) that million will purchase. it doesnt matter if it is enough to retire on, it is still a million and hence they are millionaires, that is the definition of the word!
So if I'm single I need to have $1,000,000 to be a millionaire, but if I'm married I only need $500,000, as long as he also has that much? I think that's the point but I might be misunderstanding. I always thought of millionaire as singular, but maybe not.
haha
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Remember, "And two shall become one."
arebelspy
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2011
- Messages
- 625
And if a couple has a million, can they say "we're millionaires?" (Note the plural.)
It sounds weird to say "We're millionaire." or "We're a millionaire."
You could always say we have a million dollars, but that's much more crass.
It sounds weird to say "We're millionaire." or "We're a millionaire."
You could always say we have a million dollars, but that's much more crass.
RunningBum
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 13,236
Life doesn't change for them one single bit whether you label them millionaire (or millionaires) or not. I think people get too hung up on what they can label things, and it rarely matters.
rescueme
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
True. However IMHO it's a major goal for a lot of folks, and if they can reach it by combining assets - so be it.
I look at it as my/DW's joint assets. Why? Simply, from a legal standpoint (with a living trust) some assets (such as our home) are already in the trust as "one unit" - not 50/50.
Every year, I send an updated list of assets to our (elder law) attorney, along with any account changes and current values. He also looks at it as one combined number. Why? Simply because even though we have separate wills, assets upon either death flows to the other. When we both are gone, the reaminder estate flows into the trust (for the benefit of our disabled son).
Just my POV.
Automatika
Recycles dryer sheets
You will all be assimilated.
Jay_Gatsby
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,719
I guess my point was that claiming to be a millionaire by combining spousal assets gives the couple a false sense of security. As others have pointed out, a million dollars today isn't what it used to be. At a SWR of 4%, a million dollars generates only $40k of income before taxes. Assuming no other sources of income in retirement, living on that amount (after taxes) might be a bit tight for folks who don't have a paid-off house, cars, etc...
Also, claiming a million dollar net worth by aggregating assets between two working people gives the couple an excuse to spend more and save less (or excuses a decade or more of spending and not saving). In other words, it excuses some degree of financial irresponsibility. Let's say that a couple is in their early-50s and have a combined income of $100k. They've both been working and saving for 30+ years. Assuming that their combined income has been near that $100k amount for several years, one would expect they would have accumulated more money than the hypothetical million dollars we're discussing.
Also, claiming a million dollar net worth by aggregating assets between two working people gives the couple an excuse to spend more and save less (or excuses a decade or more of spending and not saving). In other words, it excuses some degree of financial irresponsibility. Let's say that a couple is in their early-50s and have a combined income of $100k. They've both been working and saving for 30+ years. Assuming that their combined income has been near that $100k amount for several years, one would expect they would have accumulated more money than the hypothetical million dollars we're discussing.
Danmar
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
We track our assets/expenses every possible way. My spouse always had her "own" money and we keep it that way. I pay all household expenses and she uses some of her income for gifts and personal items she doesn't want me to know about while reinvesting the rest. All accounts are joint but separate with no secrets. She owns all the real estate. In Canada you need to keep income separate as there is generally no way to file "joint" returns. Based on this methodology she would own maybe 15-20% of our total net worth and on any measure she would be a millionaire.
This has worked very well for us over the years. She has a sense of independence while we manage our total positions together.
This has worked very well for us over the years. She has a sense of independence while we manage our total positions together.
W2R
Moderator Emeritus
Couldn't agree more. And for the same reasons, claiming to be a millionaire as a single person gives one a hugely false sense of security as well. Back in the 1950's, being a millionaire meant something but times have changed.
Although I might consider making such a claim on the forum, I think it would be outstandingly gauche to say such things to friends, relatives, or anyone, really.
haha
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Wow, there is a word that doesn't get heard very often today. Maybe because almost all of social life as seen on the media is outstandingly gauche.
Ha
Danmar
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Agree. Also agree with W2R. Have never talked about any of this stuff except to spouse. That's a lot of the appeal of this place.
I calculate combined for me and DW, but our retirement and investment accounts are separate. That's because she has a much higher aversion to risk than me--she's a more conservative investor. But our checkings/savings/CDs etc are all joint. And why not? She knows I don't dare spend any money w/o her informed consent. 
