I don’t think I worded my thoughts correctly, I don’t know your situation. I’d say at a high level, if you own your own place in NYC that’s worth $1M or whatever, and have $1M-$2M in assets, I’d call that rich. You pay a price for living in NYC, in terms of standard of living, but there’s a reason it’s expensive.
my apartment isn’t worth $1 million or even close to that. also, “owning” it by meaning i have a mortgage on it that i pay monthly isn’t owning it at all anyway.
I think we’re dancing around the thread title. To help, here’s the Webster dictionary definition of rich:
having abundant possessions and especially material wealth
So we’re settled on income being irrelevant. If you live in Manhattan but don’t actually own anything in Manhattan I think it’s possible to not be rich.
Then I might not call you rich unless your net worth is in the $2M range. Which I’ll admit is somewhat arbitrary.
ETA: I don’t expect you to disclose your net worth here, for the record.
Yeah, I’m with you.
I think now we are down to arguing the definition of “abundant”
2 Likes
In general it’s about five times whatever you’re worth now, I think.
2 Likes
It’s not merely living in Manhattan. Someone who isn’t as rich as you can’t make the choice to live right next to work in Manhattan and trade little to no commute for living next to work. They would have to live in a lower cost of living area and commute, possible 2 hours each way to have what you have by living in Manhattan. You do realize it’s expensive in Manhattan because more people want to live there than can afford it right?
1 Like
I’ve gotta believe it’s non linear though. Like eventually you must realize you’re rich.
You’d be surprised.
Bezos walking around like when I find that well off alien I’m gonna show off my new girlfriend
compared to that specific person i’m rich. but you’re just comparing me to that specific person. not everyone has a job in manhattan.
You are rich because you can afford to live in Manhattan. You are obviously not as rich as everyone who works it Manhattan. It’s all relative.
Reminds me of when I started working and my wife was still a grad student. I think we made less than $45K combined back then. We’re at this party in Marin at a beautiful house over looking the bay and had to hear about how tough it was to make in the Bay Area on “only” $200K a year.
disagree that this makes me rich. merely living in a high COL area does not make a person rich. you have to compare them to the other people who live there and what they actually get for their money there.
by your logic, you need to compare every person in the US to people in 3rd world nations and then we are all rich.
Compared to 3rd world nations, yes nearly every American is “rich”
so quit just calling people who live in manhattan rich.
1 Like
Most of them are.
1 Like
A specific FCAS, or posting a role for an FCAS?
Asking for a friend.
ETA: A friend of yours.
Named Marcie.
no they aren’t. if you’re going to call me rich, call every damn american rich too. don’t specifically call out manhattan people.
So ninja’d, by two posts!
No other definition makes as much sense. Pegging income numbers to it is worthless because it ignores expenses (either required or by choice to add leisure time), it ignores choices to live in nicer areas with nicer schools and less noise, which eats into more of the income.
Wealth is what makes one rich. And the only reason for wealth is for retirement (or, in some cases, so your children can have secured retirements). Additional wealth (aka richness) can be spent before retirement.
I’d suggest you fall into the “Me, I’m not rich” crowd. Pretty sure my wife is in that categrey too.