What is 'rich'?

[Bird222]

I'm wondering if there is some study/documentation on what is considered rich throughout history. Specifically, is it the top 1% of society and if your wealth is x percent of the nation's GDP? I'm looking for percentages here rather than dollar amounts.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Found a documentary for you

 

[pete6032]

I bet if you did a google search you would find what you're looking for.

 

[BurnItDwn]

How does google search though really?

 

[snoopy7548]

I think it's when you can buy 99% of what you need but it only costs 1% of your wealth.

 

[TXHokie]

I think it's when you can buy 99% of what you need but it only costs 1% of your wealth.

To me, rich is when you can buy 100% of what you want and don't really care what it costs.

 

[mdram]

it depends on who you ask.

some people define it by a certain income amount, some by networth

 

[Cozarkian]

Well, based on this:

https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-taxpayers-fall-each-income-tax-bracket/

In 2013, about 2.0% of taxpayers were in the top 3 brackets. I'd say it is a safe bet that most people would consider that 2% to be "rich." The next tax bracket has another 3.3% of taxpayers, and I suspect that many people would consider them "rich," with the exception perhaps of people who have only been in that bracket for a few years.

This, of course, doesn't account for people who are rich from built-up wealth but might not have high income or taxable gains.

I think it would be reasonable to say the top 4-5% would likely be considered "rich" by most people.

 

[Mai72]

New money or old money?
The 1% or the 0.0001%
Bill Gates or Shaq?
Your neighbor who saved $3m diligently for 30 years, or the lucky lotto winner who won $3m from a powerball.

IMO, there are so many ways to define what rich is. But, there are subtle differences. Bill Gates and Shaq could buy what ever they wanted. But, could Shaq donate $28m? He could, but it probably sting a bit financially . Gates on the other hand, it didn't even put a dent in his bank account. Gates is worth $90B vs. $400m Shaq.

BTW, just read that Gabe Newell, (Steam, AoE, former MS employee) is worth $5.5B! Holy smokes!

 

[Bird222]

It doesn't matter if it's new or old money. I guess I'm wondering what economist consider 'rich'? If you're in the top 5% is that 'rich'?

 

[Darwin333]

Well, based on this:

https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-taxpayers-fall-each-income-tax-bracket/

In 2013, about 2.0% of taxpayers were in the top 3 brackets. I'd say it is a safe bet that most people would consider that 2% to be "rich." The next tax bracket has another 3.3% of taxpayers, and I suspect that many people would consider them "rich," with the exception perhaps of people who have only been in that bracket for a few years.

This, of course, doesn't account for people who are rich from built-up wealth but might not have high income or taxable gains.

I think it would be reasonable to say the top 4-5% would likely be considered "rich" by most people.

Shrug, half a mil a year you could eventually get rich but I wouldn't call a person who is just making half a mil a year to be rich. I know a few people that make close to that and they aren't rich at all. It's their own fault of course for spending way too much of their income on fancy houses and new cars every 3ish years. If they were smart and lived in a modest, but still nice, house that they could have bought cash or easily paid off in a few years, reasonable cars and even semi-smart investments they would be rich by now.

 

[Cozarkian]

I guess I'm wondering what economist consider 'rich'?

They don't. It isn't that well-defined. As a concept, a rich person is someone with sufficient financial resources to maintain a high standard of living while putting less importance on cost when making decisions.

However, people will differ on how high the standard must be, just like people will disagree on whether a person is a 7 or 8 out of 10 in attractiveness.

 

[madoka]

Shrug, half a mil a year you could eventually get rich but I wouldn't call a person who is just making half a mil a year to be rich. I know a few people that make close to that and they aren't rich at all. It's their own fault of course for spending way too much of their income on fancy houses and new cars every 3ish years. If they were smart and lived in a modest, but still nice, house that they could have bought cash or easily paid off in a few years, reasonable cars and even semi-smart investments they would be rich by now.

You've just described me. LOL.

 

[Cozarkian]

Shrug, half a mil a year you could eventually get rich but I wouldn't call a person who is just making half a mil a year to be rich. I know a few people that make close to that and they aren't rich at all. It's their own fault of course for spending way too much of their income on fancy houses and new cars every 3ish years. If they were smart and lived in a modest, but still nice, house that they could have bought cash or easily paid off in a few years, reasonable cars and even semi-smart investments they would be rich by now.

I think this highlights the problem with attempting to define "rich." I consider rich to be more defined by short-term ability to spend and wealthy to be a sustainable, long-term ability to spend. Thus, I would probably call the people you describe to be rich, but not wealthy.

Although I do agree you need at least some savings (not just income) to be rich. Otherwise you are just "living rich."

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

To me, rich is when you can buy 100% of what you want and don't really care what it costs.

This.

If we went by income levels, most people here would be in the top 10% MINIMUM - with some likely in the top 5%

 

[Exterous]

There is rich in terms of income and then there is rich in terms of wealth. And within 'wealth' there is a huge range. Someone with a few million to their name is rich compared to most of the rest of the world. But compared to someone with a few billion to their name its nothing.

We also tend to think of rich people in context of where they live. Someone making $150k a year in a neighborhood where the median income is $50k will often look and feel rich. Put that same person in the Hamptons and not so much.

I think 1% of income is about the best definition we can get across a wide group as wealth is so hard to pin down (fortunately). Just with the understanding and caveat that there are huge discrepancies within that grouping between the 1% overall and the .001% in terms of wealth

 

[Midwayman]

Rich is relative. I supposed if you took something like a median of lifestyle in the general area you live and went say 2 standard deviations up you would probably 'rich' for wherever you live. Interestingly people seem to care a lot more about making more money than the people around them than absolute wealth.

 

[Viper GTS]

This.

If we went by income levels, most people here would be in the top 10% MINIMUM - with some likely in the top 5%

I'd bet that top 5% is wildly over-represented here. This forum is made up largely of people who were tech minded 15+ years ago making them at least solidly mid career now, in prime earning years. 95% household income in the US for 2017 was only ~225k. There are lots of people here who are way over that.

Viper GTS

 

[Sonikku]

When the law no longer applies to you.

 

[spacejamz]

Comparing the rich vs poor just in the states or globally?

 

[killster1]

Shrug, half a mil a year you could eventually get rich but I wouldn't call a person who is just making half a mil a year to be rich. I know a few people that make close to that and they aren't rich at all. It's their own fault of course for spending way too much of their income on fancy houses and new cars every 3ish years. If they were smart and lived in a modest, but still nice, house that they could have bought cash or easily paid off in a few years, reasonable cars and even semi-smart investments they would be rich by now.

so a fancy house and fancy cars is not consider rich to you i think you are confusing the term with ULTRA RICH!!! i think 500k a year is rich as long as they dont live in Switzerland or Manhattan ;P then they are just well off almost rich heh

 

[Exterous]

so a fancy house and fancy cars is not consider rich to you i think you are confusing the term with ULTRA RICH!!! i think 500k a year is rich as long as they dont live in Switzerland or Manhattan ;P then they are just well off almost rich heh

In terms of income maybe. Wealth? Hard to tell. Plenty of high income earners have no real wealth to their names because they spend it as fast as they make it

 

[Kaido]

What is 'rich'?

There are many definitions of what being rich means. The one I like the most is "how many months into the future can you survive without income from a job?" If you spend $2k a month on average & have $6k in saving, then you're 3-months rich.

It gets a bit tricky as you add more factors. Inherit a million bucks, instantly retire, and have to live off it for the next 50 years? Just by pulling it from the bank, that's $20k a year until you die. That's poverty level!

I know people who make $100k/yr & people who are millionaries and are living paycheck to paycheck because of high costs of living in their respective areas.

So the answer is, it depends on what factors are involved. You can retire to Mexico on $30k/yr & live like a king. But $30k/yr in NYC means you need a roommate & have to track every dollar you spend.

 

[purbeast0]

Actors and athletes aren't rich.

The people who can pay them those huge salaries are the rich ones.

 

[Bird222]

Rich is relative. I supposed if you took something like a median of lifestyle in the general area you live and went say 2 standard deviations up you would probably 'rich' for wherever you live. Interestingly people seem to care a lot more about making more money than the people around them than absolute wealth.

See something like this seems like a good start. Median income for the US and 2 standard deviations out (or whatever) is 'rich'.