What do you consider "Rich"

[gi0rgi0]

Your rich when you have kids and they act like a paris hilton or tori spelling and become famous.

 

[LS20]

arguing over who works for whom and how much is how much is why my (and richuk's) answer is the best

 

[shoRunner]

where's the 60K in a smaller town option?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate

Originally posted by: Amused
And speaking of talking points, yours come straight from the communist playbook.

And there we have it folks, the ideologue turning this into his own political obsession.

Way to miss the point, moron.

You are not rich until your money works for you, rather than you working for your money.

I wasn't the one who compared paid compensation to slavery.

Pot, meet kettle... minus the juvenile name calling.

 

[bobdelt]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
500k and above is rich IMO. 300k income gets you a nice house in LA

nice house != rich... you shouldnt have to be rich to get a nice house...

 

[Rubycon]

More fuel than air.

 

[dudeman007]

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate

Originally posted by: Amused
And speaking of talking points, yours come straight from the communist playbook.

And there we have it folks, the ideologue turning this into his own political obsession.

Way to miss the point, moron.

You are not rich until your money works for you, rather than you working for your money.

Sorry...Amused > you.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Rich is wealth.

Has nothing to do with income.

Bingo. I was going to answer that rich is old money. Rich is when assets make so much passive income that you don't have to work anymore.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate
Salary=slavery - someone owns you.

Completely absurd.

Employment is a mutual agreement. An employee can quit his job and/or bargain for another one. A slave cannot.

Being able to change masters doesnt make you any less of a slave. Financial independence is the lack of a need for anyone to support you whatsoever. C'mon, get your talking points out.

"No man is an island."

 

[dxkj]

Independently wealthy.

Own their house, own their cars, have several hundred thousand in savings, and have 1 million + in retirement.

That and make at least 150-200k combined a year.

 

[50cent1228]

1mil and up

 

[Captante]

Well off = Anything much north of 100k + nice house thats fully paid off

Rich = Million+

Truly wealthy = Million+ weekly

 

[SSSnail]

2 chicks at once.

 

[uberman]

I'm surprised nobody mentioned it, but... I see people who are rich with life experiences, good friends and good times. Money is not the end all to meet those needs.

 

[liluqt]

I'm rich if you count the figures after the decimal point!

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

100k combined hosuehold income is nothing if you're in the Bay Area. Assume you have one parent working in the computer industry while the other one takes care of the kids. A household of 4 can barely survive because of mortgage payments and stuff.

Double income ~ 200k+ is about well off in the Bay Area meaning you can probably live comfortably in a newer house that costs at least $1 million and up.

So to me, rich is 250k+.

But then people always say 70k is plenty to live. I don't agree. Living in CA is a killer, especially when you live in places where 2 bedroom apartments go for $1500 and up (1500 only gets you old@$$ crap that's about to fall apart).

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
For the most part, at least 3+ million/year. At about 1-3 million you have a considerable income, but your expenses will likely be close to that. It isn't until you get above 2-3 million that you start to have very large amounts of disposable income.

That's ridiculous. If you make 1M a year and you can't manage your finances well enough to have an incredible amount left over, you probably wouldn't have made it to such an income in the first place. A $1M salary can buy you an exceptional home in almost any city.

I'm not saying that you don't have money, only that you don't have large amounts of disposable income. Sure, at 1m/year you can essentially buy a cheap car as an impulse buy with little effect on your finances. At 3m/year, you can buy a large house. It is a matter of scale.

It also depends on where you are talking about as well. 1m/year in central Wisconsin will put you in the top .001% of the income bracket. That income in NYC or many parts of CA will not get you nearly as much (and those locations are where many of the jobs that pay that are)

 

[Xyclone]

300K+ to be very comfortable. 500K+ to be "rich." I live in the San Fernando Valley, a suburb to the Los Angeles metropolis.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
For the most part, at least 3+ million/year. At about 1-3 million you have a considerable income, but your expenses will likely be close to that. It isn't until you get above 2-3 million that you start to have very large amounts of disposable income.

That's ridiculous. If you make 1M a year and you can't manage your finances well enough to have an incredible amount left over, you probably wouldn't have made it to such an income in the first place. A $1M salary can buy you an exceptional home in almost any city.

I'm not saying that you don't have money, only that you don't have large amounts of disposable income. Sure, at 1m/year you can essentially buy a cheap car as an impulse buy with little effect on your finances. At 3m/year, you can buy a large house. It is a matter of scale.

It also depends on where you are talking about as well. 1m/year in central Wisconsin will put you in the top .001% of the income bracket. That income in NYC or many parts of CA will not get you nearly as much (and those locations are where many of the jobs that pay that are)

Dude, EXECs don't even make that much. Silicon Valley VPs make what.. 200k? Then maybe you get a fat bonus on top of that? Half a million a year at most. Maybe the stock options come in favorably, but you do NOT get to make 3 million / year that easily.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
For the most part, at least 3+ million/year. At about 1-3 million you have a considerable income, but your expenses will likely be close to that. It isn't until you get above 2-3 million that you start to have very large amounts of disposable income.

That's ridiculous. If you make 1M a year and you can't manage your finances well enough to have an incredible amount left over, you probably wouldn't have made it to such an income in the first place. A $1M salary can buy you an exceptional home in almost any city.

I'm not saying that you don't have money, only that you don't have large amounts of disposable income. Sure, at 1m/year you can essentially buy a cheap car as an impulse buy with little effect on your finances. At 3m/year, you can buy a large house. It is a matter of scale.

It also depends on where you are talking about as well. 1m/year in central Wisconsin will put you in the top .001% of the income bracket. That income in NYC or many parts of CA will not get you nearly as much (and those locations are where many of the jobs that pay that are)

Dude, EXECs don't even make that much. Silicon Valley VPs make what.. 200k? Then maybe you get a fat bonus on top of that? Half a million a year at most. Maybe the stock options come in favorably, but you do NOT get to make 3 million / year that easily.

I'm not saying that it is easy. My standard for "rich" is simply much higher than most. And yes, many execs DO make 2+ million/year once you figure in stock options and such. There are also a few jobs that can provide an income that high as well.

 

[SWScorch]

Back home in the wart of the armpit of NY, rich would probably be 100K and up.

 

[Legend]

Income doesn't matter. Some people will blow whatever income they get, and are not wealthy.

Rich/wealthy = Net worth > 1 million

 

[Special K]

First of all, doesn't earning $100k or more put you in the top 1% of single-person incomes in the US?

To answer the question, "rich" is anyone who has more than I do.

 

[Lurknomore]

There's rich and then there's $RICH$.
I work in the Upper East Side of Manhattan, but only work.
I cannot relate to those who are so far ahead financially- cordial relations and small talk but that's about it.
One of our customers- let's just say he's taking over for the highest elected seat in NY, owns a number ( his family) of high rises in Manhattan, and is a possible pres. candidate in 2012. Net worth- $$$$$$$$$$

 

[liluqt]

Originally posted by: Lurknomore
There's rich and then there's $RICH$.
I work in the Upper East Side of Manhattan, but only work.
I cannot relate to those who are so far ahead financially- cordial relations and small talk but that's about it.
One of our customers- let's just say he's taking over for the highest elected seat in NY, owns a number ( his family) of high rises in Manhattan, and is a possible pres. candidate in 2012. Net worth- $$$$$$$$$$

Donald Trump?