How much money makes a person rich?

[SUBMAN1]

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1846364920080818

Latest debate between the pres candidates.

I'd have to say, $1 Mil is not a rich person. I'd go as far to say that I disagree with both of their assesments. I'd say $10 mil to $50 Mil makes a person rich.

It 'used' to be a millionaire was incredibly rich. Now we have entered the age of the Billionaires!

I guess it has a lot to do with demographics too. If you live in Seattle, being a multi-millionaire is normal. Cali, same thing. Its almost to the point if you own a house, you fall in this catagory in these places automatically. What most people forget is though, it costs a lot more to live in a place like this, so people automatically make more money to compensate.

-S

[Mush Martin]

IMO Money isnt what makes a man rich.:up:
(spoken like a true pauper eh!)

[Digital_Trucker]

Thanks for sharing that:up:I derive more pleasure from reading the comments made after the stories than I do the stories themselves:rotfl:

As far as how much you have to have to be rich, I have to agree with McCain's statement (that probably doesn't get much press) that richness isn't measured in dollars (not an exact quote, but close enough).

[SUBMAN1]

Thanks for sharing that:up:I derive more pleasure from reading the comments made after the stories than I do the stories themselves:rotfl:

As far as how much you have to have to be rich, I have to agree with McCain's statement (that probably doesn't get much press) that richness isn't measured in dollars (not an exact quote, but close enough).

I'd have to actually put in here that there is a big difference between rich and wealthy. Rich people may have a lot of money at present, but wealthy people know how to maintain it. Maybe it is wealthy people that they should be talking about.

-S

[baggygreen]

Id say rich people have lots of money, but wealthy people are better-rounded - that is to say, sure they got a lot of cash, but they've also got a good family, good friends, and are content with life.

thats how i've always thought of the difference between rich and wealthy

[SUBMAN1]

Id say rich people have lots of money, but wealthy people are better-rounded - that is to say, sure they got a lot of cash, but they've also got a good family, good friends, and are content with life.

thats how i've always thought of the difference between rich and wealthyWealthy in my opinion is someone that has Assets. Very few people even know what the term asset is.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Something just smacked me across the head! It is their intention to tax the rich people to take them back down to poverty! Both of them! :o They want to leave the wealthy so as to maintain the economy.

So if you inherit a bunch of money in the future, let it be know that both these clowns want to take it from you! Obama most likely wants it all!

-S

[baggygreen]

Id say rich people have lots of money, but wealthy people are better-rounded - that is to say, sure they got a lot of cash, but they've also got a good family, good friends, and are content with life.

thats how i've always thought of the difference between rich and wealthyWealthy in my opinion is someone that has Assets. Very few people even know what the term asset is.

-SI oughta put you on the ignore list for even mentioning the term ye mongrel....

They're the scourge of my life at the moment! the number of asssets i'm responsible for just doubled... now I'm meant to know the intimate history of about 20k assets, that is, service history, users problems and complints etc.... shudder.

Strictly speaking, you're correct with your definition of wealthy, and mine is off. but thats alright, we obviously understand each other when we speak of them!;)

[SUBMAN1]

Id say rich people have lots of money, but wealthy people are better-rounded - that is to say, sure they got a lot of cash, but they've also got a good family, good friends, and are content with life.

thats how i've always thought of the difference between rich and wealthyWealthy in my opinion is someone that has Assets. Very few people even know what the term asset is.

-SI oughta put you on the ignore list for even mentioning the term ye mongrel....

They're the scourge of my life at the moment! the number of asssets i'm responsible for just doubled... now I'm meant to know the intimate history of about 20k assets, that is, service history, users problems and complints etc.... shudder.

Strictly speaking, you're correct with your definition of wealthy, and mine is off. but thats alright, we obviously understand each other when we speak of them!;)You sound like you are speaking of liabilities! :D :p Sorry - couldn't resist!

[conus00]

Well the way I see it the total amount of money is not what makes you rich. I've heard about person who won 23 million dollars in Lottery Atlanta a few years back anow she's almost broke. :nope:
I am not wealthy person, matter of fact the opposite but I'd consider myself rich if I was making every month after all my bills paid, say additional $5000.

But that's just me... Some pople could probably squander 10 grand monthly without breaking sweat... :rotfl:

[SUBMAN1]

...... Some pople could probably squander 10 grand monthly without breaking sweat... :rotfl:Its easy. Trust me.

-S

[Digital_Trucker]

Very few people even know what the term asset is.

-S
What, an asset isn't a miniature a55?

[SUBMAN1]

Very few people even know what the term asset is.

-S
What, an asset isn't a miniature a55?No, and no on anything that you own that doesn't generate monthly income. People assume that the term would apply to ones house even - but hardly. A house is very much a liability.

-S

[Digital_Trucker]

No, and no on anything that you own that doesn't generate monthly income. People assume that the term would apply to ones house even - but hardly. A house is very much a liability.

-S
That would depend on whether the value of the house was going up faster than the maintenance and interest on the mortgage. A liquid asset it wouldn't be, but an asset it would.

[SUBMAN1]

That would depend on whether the value of the house was going up faster than the maintenance and interest on the mortgage. A liquid asset it wouldn't be, but an asset it would.Negative. Try telling that to your bank. They are scoring you based on the appropriate answer you give them.

I like your thinking though. You are analyzing it.

-S

[conus00]

...... Some pople could probably squander 10 grand monthly without breaking sweat... :rotfl:Its easy. Trust me.

-S
You are talking like you have already tried it...
Have you ever squandered 10 g's in a month? At least once?
:rotfl:

[Platapus]

Well looking at MY bank account, I am neither rich nor wealthy.

But I am pretty happy so I think I am doing well :up:

[SUBMAN1]

...... Some pople could probably squander 10 grand monthly without breaking sweat... :rotfl:Its easy. Trust me.

-S
You are talking like you have already tried it...
Have you ever squandered 10 g's in a month? At least once?
:rotfl:Easy. And more. For years straight. Latest car. Best computer. Best couch. Every stereo must have at least 1000 Watts and speakers should be at least 3 digits poundage wise. Trust me - easy.

-S

[Digital_Trucker]

That would depend on whether the value of the house was going up faster than the maintenance and interest on the mortgage. A liquid asset it wouldn't be, but an asset it would.Negative. Try telling that to your bank. They are scoring you based on the appropriate answer you give them.

I like your thinking though. You are analyzing it.

-S

Ah, you didn't say we were talking about a bank's definition of an asset :damn: All bets are off when the bank's involved.

[Platapus]

Subman brings up a good point though. A house can be a potential asset when (if) you can sell it.

People get into trouble when they stop considering their house a potential asset and start considering it an actual asset. :nope:

Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it.
Publilius Syrus (dead smart guy)

As I tell the Frau, Our house is worthless, until we can find someone willing to put money on the line for it. It may have a potential worth, but it will be unrealized until the time of sale.

[SUBMAN1]

Subman brings up a good point though. A house can be a potential asset when (if) you can sell it.Nothing that doesn't generate income monthly is an asset. Your house burns down tomorrow. Is it an asset or liability? When you understand this, your bank will loan you 7 digits no problem. The problem is, unless you are using that money to create an asset, you better not borrow it.

I've walked into BECU, they handed me a letter of credit for 6 digits for a car I was yet to buy, no questions asked. You don't know how tempted one becomes.

It would seem my FICO score is off the charts. Problem is, FICO is not anything more than an I love debt score.

My FICO is still off the charts. I can have anything I want at any point in time I want. Problem is, would you rather finance your banks Ferrari, or your own? This is where maturity comes in. I have wisened up. Have you? My FICO continues to decline, and my ultimate score will be '0'. I have bought out my last cars. I have cleared up the Credit Cards. They will all be a distant memory to me. Now my FICO declines simply because I no longer use debt. Good riddance.

There is only one CC in this house any more. It stays around for my online purchases. Paid in full monthly if it is even used once during the year.

-S

[bookworm_020]

In Zimbabwe, you can be a billionare and staving:nope:

I would consider someone who is worth 1 million in cash and assets to be rich. But many of the "rich people" are rich only on paper. A bad day at the stockmarket can send them to the wall very quickly.

[August]

To me rich is not having to work but be able to live comfortably for the rest of your life. I don't think that in todays dollars 1 million bucks would do it.

[Sailor Steve]

Given what it takes to make me happy, a million would be way more than I'd ever spend.

[Seahorse1]

Something just smacked me across the head! It is their intention to tax the rich people to take them back down to poverty! Both of them! :o They want to leave the wealthy so as to maintain the economy.

So if you inherit a bunch of money in the future, let it be know that both these clowns want to take it from you! Obama most likely wants it all!

-SNo KiDDING....
:nope: Obama wants to raise income taxes, bring back the inheritance tax, and apply a windfall tax to your savings and retirement accounts and limit how much you can invest. So much for the freedom to do what I want with MY money. I wouldn't exactly call my 401K a "windfall" but I worked for it and it shouldn't be taxed to redistribute the "wealth" to millions of illegal immigrants and homeless drug addicts that didn't work for it!:damn:. People forget the Clinton era and how much they paid in taxes... at least Bush did away with the inheritance tax, known as the "death tax". Families (especially farmers rolling over in their graves) that lost farms that had been in their families for generations when their sons and daughters couldn't pay the captial gains without selling the farm.
I will always be rich and wealthy and happy if I can work hard at something that I love and be responsible for myself, it's a pretty simple equation.

[Reece]

Count me out of this thread!:yep:

[Skybird]

For whom enough is not enough, it will never be enough. And that is a poor guy in my book.