Discuss How much do you need to be "rich"?

[Mr. M]

Yeah with $1 million you are well off and wealthy.............but you're not rich. Hear me out.

In todays world of globalization and increasing property prices $1 million isn't as much as people think it it. That some of money will barely get you a town home in Chelsea London or if you just want to buy a nice big home anywhere in the world half of the sum will easily be spent. Then you'd want to live out your dreams and buy a few fancy cars and fly out to St. Barts and Monaco and floss there a couple of times a year. And before you will no it you won't be any much wealthier than the average well educated mortal.
By definition of rich is when you have to much money that you don't have to work and can simply live off the interest of your money, while at the same time enjoying just about anything in life. IMO you can't do that unless you are sitting on a 10 million dollar account.

That's true. I change my mind, 100 million would be more appropriate.

 

[DaSilva]

I think you need at lest 2 Billions to be "rich" and you need to have half in cash

I'll personally Chill the day I have 4 Billions.
Before that, I'll work everyday and try to stay very lucky!

 

[Matt]

When they talk about the top 1% of the country, their not talking billionaires per se. They are talking about people with incomes above half a million. They fall right into to the top 1% and are in the highest tax bracket.

 

[wltsm]

You need way more than $1million to be rich. I reckon at least $50million to make yourself rich.

The defination of rich is you can afford anything you want, and basically have everything you want!

 

[450SEL6.9]

Take a look at the 2007 Sunday Times Rich List.

I do have my doubts on their accuracy. Privately-held fortunes are impossible to value. Celebrity fortunes also keep increasing at massive percentages. Hmm . . . I always wonder if some celeb publicist planted certain numbers. They seem perpetually inflated.

A Canadian Rich List retracted one family when it wrote to the magazine saying that if the editors believed their valuation of their family business, the family will sell it to them for a 50% discount.

 

[Centurion]

Take a look at the 2007 Sunday Times Rich List.

I do have my doubts on their accuracy. Privately-held fortunes are impossible to value. Celebrity fortunes also keep increasing at massive percentages. Hmm . . . I always wonder if some celeb publicist planted certain numbers. They seem perpetually inflated.

A Canadian Rich List retracted one family when it wrote to the magazine saying that if the editors believed their valuation of their family business, the family will sell it to them for a 50% discount.

You are absolutely right. Most lists are only approximations and are subject to be false. There are all sorts of lope holes in some countries allowing you to hide money. Lots of rich people hide money abroad, in places like the Cayman Islands and even Switzerland to prevent their fortunes be raped by the tax authority back home.
You'd be amazed by the number of rich people who hire attorneys specialized in hiding money and keeping it away from the domestic government.

 

[LaArtist]

hmm give me enough to buy and own a zonda without it stressing my pocket..
that would be rich enough for me..

 

[NarutoRamen]

In my book in order to be "Rich" you need a few things to qualify.

1. Huge Mansion.
2. Vacation Property somewhere in the world.
3. At least 2 exotic cars.
4. Enough money in the bank where even if you didn't work you'd still make thousands off just interest.

By my calculations that should put you around the 25-50million mark.

 

[450SEL6.9]

Why would you need those things to be rich, Naruto? They might make you feel rich, but many households who own mansions, exotic cars, cottages, etc. . . do so by writing cheques they one day can't cash.

Hong Kong billionairess Nina Wang died a few weeks ago. She had none of the top three things you listed. She was a self-confessed penny pincher. Her husband, who was kidnapped in 1990 and never found, was another notorious miser. Their collective business left her with a $4.2 billion U.S. fortune. That figure is probably very low. Their real estate company used very little debt and paid cash to build many of its skyscrapers, which is almost unheard of. It's not unrealistic to think Wang was worth more than $10 billion! That didn't change her spending habits. She's not alone; many older billionaires are dirt cheap. They would never splash out on more house than they need, much less cars that depreciate the moment they leave the lot.

Is being rich now a material image promoted by the marketing men? Is that why so many middle-class households borrow and borrow to live as if they're truly rich? I'm sure Naruto isn't the only one who associates wealth with mansions, flash cars and other exotics.

 

[SDNR]

Is being rich now a material image promoted by the marketing men? Is that why so many middle-class households borrow and borrow to live as if they're truly rich? I'm sure Naruto isn't the only one who associates wealth with mansions, flash cars and other exotics.

I totally agree Ray.

I think the big mansions and exotic cars are part of the American dream.

It seems to me, that when Americans make a lot of money, they immediately buy an enormous house and fill it with tasteless, chintzy, furniture and objects -- much like you see on the music videos -- of course, this is not just an American thing though.

That's all very well if you're happy to live a life of fake luxury (as many people do) ...but to live genuinely well is terribly expensive.

 

[Centurion]

Is that why so many middle-class households borrow and borrow to live as if they're truly rich?

Excellent point you brought up there. They talked about it on 60 minutes a year ago. I was very shocked because in Sweden it is totally orthodox to take loans for buying material things except a house or a car. On the show they showed a couple of people who had used their house as a security for for like 5 loans or something. They were all in dept but didn't have a problem with it.

 

[Matt]

Debt is every where- in the private sector, the public sector etc. etc. However if its domestic debt-or debt within the U.S. it shouldnt hurt the economy all that much-but if we owe all sorts of money to neighboring countries then we might have some issues.

 

[SDNR]

Debt is every where- in the private sector, the public sector etc. etc. However if its domestic debt-or debt within the U.S. it shouldnt hurt the economy all that much-but if we owe all sorts of money to neighboring countries then we might have some issues.

Also, don't forget that the Japanese and Chinese Foreign banks buy US government debt -- they will make hundreds of billions of dollars from the excesses of the US.

The future could be very bleak for millions of people.

Check out THIS thread.

 

[NarutoRamen]

To answer your questions to why one might have those things to truly say they're rich is because where I come from, the culture I was born into and the culture I live in now Wealth isn't measured by How much money is in your bank account, it is measured by the things you own.

I didn't say that you have to take out loans to buy your cars, to buy your big ass house or any of that. I said you must OWN those things. Owning means that everything has been paid off. I'm not one of those people who count loans as owning something. For example, I don't own my car yet, the bank owns it. So when someone asks me, "is that your?" I always tell them, "I'm still paying it off." That is how I classify things. So when I say you must own those things I mean you must absolutely, completely F__King own it.

A mansion 5-10million
2 super exotics: 1million
extra property: 5-10 milion

just that right there is 11-21milion. any questions?

 

[450SEL6.9]

I didn't that say you or anyone in particular have to take out loans either to afford mansions, cars, cottages either . . . I was merely pointing out a sad fact that many households do pay for their lavish lifestyles with easy debt. Originally, you never said you needed to "own" the abovementioned items. You said you needed to "have" them. I didn't know what you mean by having them.

Also, ownership doesn't have much to do with debt. I worked in both a bank and a law firm. Legally, ownership doesn't mean everything has been paid off. I know you have a different perspective and that's okay. According to most property laws, ownership has more to do with title. If a property developer puts up a building, it owns the finished building, even if it had to borrow from a bank to build it. The bank has a claim against ownership only if their loan is not repaid.

 

[450SEL6.9]

Debt is every where- in the private sector, the public sector etc. etc. However if its domestic debt-or debt within the U.S. it shouldnt hurt the economy all that much-but if we owe all sorts of money to neighboring countries then we might have some issues.

But a debt is still a debt. Debts need to be repaid! Didn't John Travolta play a kneecap-smashing loan shark in a movie and say exactly that?

Canada's economy is booming and the outgoing central bank head is already expressing concern about debt-financed takeovers by hedge funds and private equity. These are multibillion dollar businesses. If their borrowings provoke concern, than households borrowing massively against property should be more troubling.

 

[Mr. M]

By the way, did anyone notice the spectacular rise of a Mexican magnate to near the top of the richest men in the world list? I didn't catch his name, surname Slim I think, and he's third (or second richest).

 

[ateekt]

I'll be happy, getting around "3-5 Million" Dollars (annually) & I guess, it's enough ...!

 

[notic]

1 million in assets not including your home. thats probably what is considered rich in the world. for most of us here in the forum, we are probably in the top 15% of the worlds wealth just having the opportunity to live in the countries we do and having the a computer to socialize with. There is no extreme poverty in the developed world. poverty in the developed world just means that you are excluded from cultural goods (in my case, a mac book pro). So the disparity in wealth on a global basis is quite large. Relative wealth in your own country may be different however seeing as how some country's gdp per capita doubles even the most developed of countries (ie. luxembourg). If any of you are ever interested in how big the gap is between the rich and the poor in your country, just look up (probably on google) the Lorenz curve or the Gini coefficient.

Me personally, I'll slow down or stop when I hit 5m (USD..or maybe not considering the US economy these days, so maybe Euro?) in assets. Otherwise get rich or die trying.

Is being rich now a material image promoted by the marketing men? Is that why so many middle-class households borrow and borrow to live as if they're truly rich?

I personally think that is the case, especially in America where consumption has been a huge part of gdp for so many years. Here is an example.

China's savings rate is 40% (roughly), American? In the negative territory. Put down those lattes and cut up those credit cards! To be fair though, china is a growing country and america has already grown, but still, stop the overspending! Savings = investment, investment = growth (yes, i know there are other factors that drive growth, but the accumulation of capital is still very important).