At what point is a Person "Rich"
- Thread starter xxDOYLExx
- Start date
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
King of the Hill is awesome.
It's all about perspective: To me anyone making 50k is doing great and 100k is pretty rich. To a homeless or unemployed person, I am rich.
It's all about perspective: To me anyone making 50k is doing great and 100k is pretty rich. To a homeless or unemployed person, I am rich.
[quote name='mykevermin']There you go. While it's noble of you to plan for the future like that, the point is that you are able to plan for the future like that, and not simply wish for the future like that.[/QUOTE]
But plenty of people in the middle class are able to do that. It doesn't mean your rich if you can do that, it means you're not poor.
My parents saved up for my college education (and my brother's, though he didn't go) and my mom was a stay at home mom and my dad had a blue collar job working on telephone lines.
They just lived below their means in an area with low cost of living and saved every penny they could. We took few vacations and always drove when we did go etc.
So I just don't think the notion of "Rich" is as simple as you make it out to be. People can be well off, even wealthy, compared to the average joe without being rich.
In this case someone who's rich can easily save up for kids education, retirement etc. and still have a ton of money to spend on leisure. At least that's how I view being rich. It's not just being well off, it's having a large disposable income.
Poor to lower middle class folks have really no disposable income and can't save up much of anything. Middle class to upper middle class have extra income and can save up a bit and have a bit left over for leisure--more at the upper end. The upper class/rich have a ton of disposable income, can save up for everything and still spend nearly whatever they want on leisure.
Even those aren't perfect descriptors, but I find it better than throwing a raw income number out there with no consideration for other factors, or saying a person is rich if they can live in a nice neighborhood and save up for college for their kids etc.
But plenty of people in the middle class are able to do that. It doesn't mean your rich if you can do that, it means you're not poor.
My parents saved up for my college education (and my brother's, though he didn't go) and my mom was a stay at home mom and my dad had a blue collar job working on telephone lines.
They just lived below their means in an area with low cost of living and saved every penny they could. We took few vacations and always drove when we did go etc.
So I just don't think the notion of "Rich" is as simple as you make it out to be. People can be well off, even wealthy, compared to the average joe without being rich.
In this case someone who's rich can easily save up for kids education, retirement etc. and still have a ton of money to spend on leisure. At least that's how I view being rich. It's not just being well off, it's having a large disposable income.
Poor to lower middle class folks have really no disposable income and can't save up much of anything. Middle class to upper middle class have extra income and can save up a bit and have a bit left over for leisure--more at the upper end. The upper class/rich have a ton of disposable income, can save up for everything and still spend nearly whatever they want on leisure.
Even those aren't perfect descriptors, but I find it better than throwing a raw income number out there with no consideration for other factors, or saying a person is rich if they can live in a nice neighborhood and save up for college for their kids etc.
[quote name='dmaul1114']But plenty of people in the middle class are able to do that. It doesn't mean your rich if you can do that, it means you're not poor.
My parents saved up for my college education (and my brother's, though he didn't go) and my mom was a stay at home mom and my dad had a blue collar job working on telephone lines.
They just lived below their means in an area with low cost of living and saved every penny they could. We took few vacations and always drove when we did go etc.
So I just don't think the notion of "Rich" is as simple as you make it out to be. People can be well off, even wealthy, compared to the average joe without being rich.
In this case someone who's rich can easily save up for kids education, retirement etc. and still have a ton of money to spend on leisure. At least that's how I view being rich. It's not just being well off, it's having a large disposable income.
Poor to lower middle class folks have really no disposable income and can't save up much of anything. Middle class to upper middle class have extra income and can save up a bit and have a bit left over for leisure--more at the upper end. The upper class/rich have a ton of disposable income, can save up for everything and still spend nearly whatever they want on leisure.
Even those aren't perfect descriptors, but I find it better than throwing a raw income number out there with no consideration for other factors, or saying a person is rich if they can live in a nice neighborhood and save up for college for their kids etc.[/QUOTE]
Were we separated at birth? I could have typed the exact same thing except substituting "blue collar job working on telephone lines" with government job. I feel the exact same way about this issue too.
My parents saved up for my college education (and my brother's, though he didn't go) and my mom was a stay at home mom and my dad had a blue collar job working on telephone lines.
They just lived below their means in an area with low cost of living and saved every penny they could. We took few vacations and always drove when we did go etc.
So I just don't think the notion of "Rich" is as simple as you make it out to be. People can be well off, even wealthy, compared to the average joe without being rich.
In this case someone who's rich can easily save up for kids education, retirement etc. and still have a ton of money to spend on leisure. At least that's how I view being rich. It's not just being well off, it's having a large disposable income.
Poor to lower middle class folks have really no disposable income and can't save up much of anything. Middle class to upper middle class have extra income and can save up a bit and have a bit left over for leisure--more at the upper end. The upper class/rich have a ton of disposable income, can save up for everything and still spend nearly whatever they want on leisure.
Even those aren't perfect descriptors, but I find it better than throwing a raw income number out there with no consideration for other factors, or saying a person is rich if they can live in a nice neighborhood and save up for college for their kids etc.[/QUOTE]
Were we separated at birth? I could have typed the exact same thing except substituting "blue collar job working on telephone lines" with government job. I feel the exact same way about this issue too.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='dmaul1114']But plenty of people in the middle class are able to do that. It doesn't mean your rich if you can do that, it means you're not poor.
My parents saved up for my college education (and my brother's, though he didn't go) and my mom was a stay at home mom and my dad had a blue collar job working on telephone lines.
They just lived below their means in an area with low cost of living and saved every penny they could. We took few vacations and always drove when we did go etc.
So I just don't think the notion of "Rich" is as simple as you make it out to be. People can be well off, even wealthy, compared to the average joe without being rich.
In this case someone who's rich can easily save up for kids education, retirement etc. and still have a ton of money to spend on leisure. At least that's how I view being rich. It's not just being well off, it's having a large disposable income.
Poor to lower middle class folks have really no disposable income and can't save up much of anything. Middle class to upper middle class have extra income and can save up a bit and have a bit left over for leisure--more at the upper end. The upper class/rich have a ton of disposable income, can save up for everything and still spend nearly whatever they want on leisure.
Even those aren't perfect descriptors, but I find it better than throwing a raw income number out there with no consideration for other factors, or saying a person is rich if they can live in a nice neighborhood and save up for college for their kids etc.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how much they said they made, so I wasn't saying "rich" or "not rich." I was saying that they claimed they couldn't afford a car, but if they have multiple savings accounts they're putting money into each and every month, then "not being able to afford a car" is a decision they make, rather than a de facto situation.
My parents saved up for my college education (and my brother's, though he didn't go) and my mom was a stay at home mom and my dad had a blue collar job working on telephone lines.
They just lived below their means in an area with low cost of living and saved every penny they could. We took few vacations and always drove when we did go etc.
So I just don't think the notion of "Rich" is as simple as you make it out to be. People can be well off, even wealthy, compared to the average joe without being rich.
In this case someone who's rich can easily save up for kids education, retirement etc. and still have a ton of money to spend on leisure. At least that's how I view being rich. It's not just being well off, it's having a large disposable income.
Poor to lower middle class folks have really no disposable income and can't save up much of anything. Middle class to upper middle class have extra income and can save up a bit and have a bit left over for leisure--more at the upper end. The upper class/rich have a ton of disposable income, can save up for everything and still spend nearly whatever they want on leisure.
Even those aren't perfect descriptors, but I find it better than throwing a raw income number out there with no consideration for other factors, or saying a person is rich if they can live in a nice neighborhood and save up for college for their kids etc.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how much they said they made, so I wasn't saying "rich" or "not rich." I was saying that they claimed they couldn't afford a car, but if they have multiple savings accounts they're putting money into each and every month, then "not being able to afford a car" is a decision they make, rather than a de facto situation.
I was mixing that comment up with your earlier one about someone being rich if they made more than $130K, could afford to live in javery's neighborhood etc.
depascal22
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 92 (100%)
It's psychologically easier to say you can't afford it though. If I say I can't afford something, there's no debate to be had. If I choose not to do something, the wife could always come in later and choose something else.
It's the same reason rich can't be tied down to a specific number. Most of it comes from how happy you are.
It's the same reason rich can't be tied down to a specific number. Most of it comes from how happy you are.
[quote name='mykevermin']I don't know how much they said they made, so I wasn't saying "rich" or "not rich." I was saying that they claimed they couldn't afford a car, but if they have multiple savings accounts they're putting money into each and every month, then "not being able to afford a car" is a decision they make, rather than a de facto situation.[/QUOTE]
True that it's a choice, but it's sort of a Hobson's choice. My options are to nest egg the kids education now or put the money into a car. It's not really much of a choice -- at least not to me.
I'm sure there are some on here already warming up their keyboards to type "
your kids, let 'em blah blah blah argle!". :lol:
At any rate, I never claimed I was poor or some kind of victim. I just picture someone who is definably "rich" as not having to make the choice I have.
True that it's a choice, but it's sort of a Hobson's choice. My options are to nest egg the kids education now or put the money into a car. It's not really much of a choice -- at least not to me.
I'm sure there are some on here already warming up their keyboards to type "
your kids, let 'em blah blah blah argle!". :lol:At any rate, I never claimed I was poor or some kind of victim. I just picture someone who is definably "rich" as not having to make the choice I have.
bread's done