how much income/networth does P&N require to classfiy someone as rich?

[brianmanahan]

i see a lot of disdain for the rich here, but to my knowledge nobody has defined who is in this category.

if i were to have say 500$k, would i be rich? or would it take 1$M or 5$M or more?

would my income matter, or my net worth, or both?

 

[Moonbeam]

All I know is that I'm worthless and lots of folk here hate me.

 

[dmcowen674]

how much income/networth does P&N require to classfiy someone as rich?

i see a lot of disdain for the rich here, but to my knowledge nobody has defined who is in this category.

if i were to have say 500$k, would i be rich? or would it take 1$M or 5$M or more?

would my income matter, or my net worth, or both?

Simply because you have to ask means you are not rich.

Most articles say income of $250,000

Apparently a majority of P&Ners make that much based on their posts.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

We use the universal definition; anyone who has more than me.

 

[Greenman]

All I know is that I'm worthless and lots of folk here hate me.

I honestly don't believe that. I think a lot of people here are sick of you, but I very much doubt anyone hates you.

 

[DrPizza]

There are a lot of people who never have to work a day; they gain their income via investments, etc. I'd call those rich. $250k: upper middle class. $100k-$250k: middle middle-class. $30k-$100k: lower middle class. <$30k Poor (household incomes).

 

[UberNeuman]

All I know is that I'm worthless and lots of folk here hate me.

You sir, have more worth than you can dream of..

 

[Slew Foot]

The liberal definition of rich is anyone who makes more than themself. Most normal people see someone as rich when they can comfortably live off of their investments without having to hold a regular job.

 

[UberNeuman]

The liberal definition of rich is anyone who makes more than themself. Most normal people see someone as rich when they can comfortably live off of their investments without having to hold a regular job.

The worm eats itself...

 

[hans030390]

There are a lot of people who never have to work a day; they gain their income via investments, etc. I'd call those rich. $250k: upper middle class. $100k-$250k: middle middle-class. $30k-$100k: lower middle class. <$30k Poor (household incomes).

I believe upper bound household annual income to be considered upper middle class in the USA is around $160-170K.

Got this tidbit from Wikipedia (sources are cited in article):

Sociologists Dennis Gilbert, Willam Thompson and Joseph Hickey estimate the upper middle class to constitute roughly 15% of the population. Using the 15% figure one may conclude that the American upper middle class consists, strictly in an income sense, of professionals with personal incomes in excess of $62,500, who commonly reside in households with six figure incomes.

It would appear an annual household income of $167K is in the top 5% of household incomes as well. From a purely percentage-based standpoint, that would seem "rich," but I'm not sure that really resonates as "rich" to others given that's still nothing monetarily compared to what some individuals and families bring in annually.

Also, a big part of this is location and cost of living at that location, which sometimes is offset by a difference in pay as well (but not always). For example, my profession pays roughly the same regardless of my location. If I were still living where I was in Indiana, my income would appear and "feel" larger than it does in Colorado due to a lower cost of living.

That said, income can reach a point where cost of living almost makes no difference. If I had to give a set value to classify someone as "rich," I would say about $250K annually for an individually or about $400-500K annually for a household.

 

[Moonbeam]

You sir, have more worth than you can dream of..

Most kind of you. But my dreams are nightmares.

 

[Moonbeam]

I honestly don't believe that. I think a lot of people here are sick of you, but I very much doubt anyone hates you.

Well that's just sad then. I am like my father who said he was 200% American and hated everybody. This dump must be full of commies.

 

[UberNeuman]

Most kind of you. But my dreams are nightmares.

Reality isn't a nightmare. It's what needs to faced. And that's we shall do, good sir! That's what we shall do...

 

[TheAdvocate]

Income has no direct correlation to being rich. I have seen too many bankrupt professionals pulling 6 figure salaries and I knew a $40k/yr food broker who drove a 20 year old car and lived modestly so he could invest in RE. He never made any real money til he invested in some riverside property and got lucky when a developer offered him $5mill. He didnt even buy a new car with the money (he did buy a nice house).

Rich is defined by what you have/keep, not what you make. Or as the old adage goes - "you are not rich until your money works for you, not the other way around." If you are still a slave to a paycheck you are just that. Financial freedom has always been the basis of being categorized as rich.

 

[ultimatebob]

Obama seemed to think that the limit was $250,000 a year, since that's who he wanted to tax more.

 

[MagickMan]

There are a lot of people who never have to work a day; they gain their income via investments, etc. I'd call those rich. $250k: upper middle class. $100k-$250k: middle middle-class. $30k-$100k: lower middle class. <$30k Poor (household incomes).

Correct. If you have no debt, the lion's share of your income is from capital gains, and you don't have to work a job, aka. work for "the man", then you're rich.

There are a lot of high-income "poor" people in this world; stupid individuals who have mountains of debt, no real assets, and make well into 6 figures each year. One false step and they're living in a van by the river, despite the fact they live in a McMansion (with a 2nd mortgage), drive an $80k Benz (leased), and wear $800 jeans (bought with perpetually maxed-out CCs). That's the `Merkin dream.

 

[fskimospy]

The idea of 'middle class' here is pretty distorted on here I think. It is probably skewed upwards because most people here make more money than average.

$250k represents (approximately) the 98th percentile in household income. To call people making more money than 98% of other people in the middle seems to stretch the word 'middle' until it has lost all meaning. Additionally, a household income of $30k a year puts you at approximately the 40th percentile for incomes. It seems odd to say that someone who makes more money than 40% of the country as poor. You would think the middle class would be something to the effect of the 25th percentile to the 75th percentile, not the 40th percentile to the 98th.

People's perception of rich and poor is skewed by their own experiences, and I would guess the average person on here has a fairly high income.

 

[nehalem256]

The idea of 'middle class' here is pretty distorted on here I think. It is probably skewed upwards because most people here make more money than average.

$250k represents (approximately) the 98th percentile in household income. To call people making more money than 98% of other people in the middle seems to stretch the word 'middle' until it has lost all meaning. Additionally, a household income of $30k a year puts you at approximately the 40th percentile for incomes. It seems odd to say that someone who makes more money than 40% of the country as poor. You would think the middle class would be something to the effect of the 25th percentile to the 75th percentile, not the 40th percentile to the 98th.

People's perception of rich and poor is skewed by their own experiences, and I would guess the average person on here has a fairly high income.

Middle class is no so much a technical term as you are describing it. But more a way to describe someone who isn't a "serf" or "nobility".

This is also why people will say that in 3rd world countries there are relatively few middle class people, and there is an emerging global middle class; based on the definition you are putting forth such a thing would be impossible.

 

[Genx87]

I dont think of rich in terms of income but in terms of wealth. Somebody making 250K a year has a high income. But if they spend it foolishly they can still be middle class or even poor. Rich to me is somebody with enough wealth they dont need to work another day in their life.

 

[PricklyPete]

I dont think of rich in terms of income but in terms of wealth. Somebody making 250K a year has a high income. But if they spend it foolishly they can still be middle class or even poor. Rich to me is somebody with enough wealth they dont need to work another day in their life.

This. Wealth is not measured by income.

 

[FerrelGeek]

We use the universal definition; anyone who has more than me.

Correction - Anyone who has more than McOwned.

 

[brycejones]

Simply because you have to ask means you are not rich.

Most articles say income of $250,000

Apparently a majority of P&Ners make that much based on their posts.

Don't forget they only bang 11s as well.

 

[Scotteq]

"...any income which is at least a thousand dollars more per year than one's wife's sister's husband..."

 

[fskimospy]

This. Wealth is not measured by income.

Wealth and income are two different things, but 'rich' does not need to be exclusively defined by either. Needless to say, someone with an income of $250k and someone with an income of $30k are not equally rich if they both only have 10k in the bank.

I would say that our commonly used definition includes not only the wealth that is in the bank at the end of the year but also that which you consumed during that time period. It seems myopic to ignore that.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

All I know is that I'm worthless and lots of folk here hate me.

Ohhhh poor, poor Moonbeam.

See you're going with the poor helpless victim again.