What Do You Consider Rich?

[luvmy3]

And as the median income, that is the perfect definition of middle class. If you're making more than twice what the middle class is, you are rich.

Median incomes may be higher in some states, but I can garuntee no state has a median income of 100k +.

If I made $50,000 where I live I would live the way you described what being poor would be. So by your definition would I be what you consider poor?

 

[ntsammy5]

This cannot be determined nationally. Salaries and cost of living vary greatly. In other words, there is no "pat" answer that applies across the country...

Ain't that the truth. The company I work for give a 45% premium for salaries in the NY Metro area - and it's not enough. What's wealthy in Buffalo is definitely not wealthy in Manhattan.

I'm not sure what wealthy is, but I'm comfortable and that's good enough for me!

 

[Christine]

"I don't believe that the Cost Of Living in a certain area should dictate what classifies someone as "rich" or "poor."
The OP says she makes six figures but lives in a high COL area, so she isn't rich. I disagree. You choose to live in a high COL area. You choose that lifestyle. "

I was born into this area and started my career here living with my parents. My job, say, in Alabama would not make this much money. The field that I am trained in isn't even available to be worked in other areas except large metropolis areas (cities). I can't say, well, I want to take what I do and move to Smalltown, VA and even think I can find that job, much less get any money for it. The job I can do is here, or in San Diego.

"You could choose to take your six figure salary and buy a home that's not in the Northern Virginia area. Just like you choose not to buy a multi-million dollar home in Great Falls because you couldn't afford it on your salary. I know the area, and I also know that you could choose to live 45 miles away to purchase a much cheaper house (we're talking hundreds of thousands in difference), and just commute to your job like many other Americans do."

I already do live 45-60 minutes away from my office. I *am* in that cheaper house, cheaper area. My commuting costs are also much higher because of it. And the school system in this cheaper area is verging on YUCK!! I know where I'd like to live--a little further north, but even with my whopping 6 figures, I feel that it is too expensive. Only the those making $200,000 or higher can swing that area (which is 20 miles from work)

You can't say you aren't rich because of what you choose to do with your money.

For example, I worked in Alexandria, because that's where the money was at the time. I lived three hours away, because that's where my house was. You know, the waterfront 3 bedroom, 2 bath house I paid a whopping $55k for?

I fixed my schedule so I worked 4 days a week, staying at a friends house three nights a week to make it possible.

Your six figure salary is much more than I was making. But according to you, I can't call you rich because of the lifestyle choices you make. That's bogus.

Not sure that living 3 hours away from my job with 2 kids is a smart lifestyle choice. I know very few people (but yes there are one or two), that do what you did and neither of them had families.

"If you (general you) make $100 grand and buy a $1.2 million dollar house and drive a brand new beamer, but have little to no spending money, you aren't rich because your COL is high."

How about a $170,000 mortgage and a 2002 Camry and 2005 Highlander. I would NEVER drive a Beamerand find them extravagant. Don't assume that I am poor with the Lexus.

"But if I make $50 grand a year, buy a $55k house and paid only $10 grand for a used car, I'm richer than you because I have a nest egg or retirement plan or college savings for my kid?"

No, you're not richer than me. Your obvious sacrifice of living 3 hours away enabled you to do that. You did choose to make sacrifices that, healthwise and family-wise I would find intolerable and would probably make me physically ill.

What you do with your money is your own decision. Spend it wisely, save it, blow it, it makes no difference to me. But you can't classify someone who makes a lot of money as "not rich" just because they've made unwise decisions about how to spend that money.

Living in a home with a $1300 mortgage is not unwise or extravagant. Living in a home 45 minutes to an hour away from my job is not extravagant. Clipping coupons, eating at counter service such as Chipotle or Boston Market once a week is not rich. I will tell you that every person who lives in this area making what I make is not rich. Obviously we disagree on that.

"And one of the decisions we all make in our life is whether or not to live in a high COL area. That's a decision you make, it doesn't affect your "richness" or "poorness."

I chose to live in this area because that is where the job is. Same for my husband. He is an electrician and there is a lot of work here. Do you know how many "travelers" my husband has on his job? This isn't even due to the recent economic issues. These are people (electricians) that have had to leave their families behind in West Virginia, small towns in North/South Carolina, Texas, and Florida and come to the DC area so they can get good steady electrical work and carry health insurance for their families. Because in their low cost of living towns, they have very little work that they can rely on. I started my career living in my parents home as a young person. I gained my experience and skills in a field that only has jobs in a few locations on the east coast and one on the west coast. I did not graduate from college and got my start like most struggling young people do--in their hometown, which was Maryland for me. All high COL areas. I cannot walk out of my job and go to Hometown, Michigan and get my job there, even for 75% of my pay. It doesn't exist. Was it really a conscioius "choice" I made? I don't think so. Especially when we're young, we all get moving on our careers and, in many ways, are pushed along from where we start. At 22 years old, I was not sitting there analyzing where the lowest cost of living was in relation to job fields. Hindsight is 20/20.

 

[mjkacmom]

I never said they should be government subsidized, I just said they were poor.



And as the median income, that is the perfect definition of middle class. If you're making more than twice what the middle class is, you are rich.

Median incomes may be higher in some states, but I can garuntee no state has a median income of 100k +.

The median income here is $75,000, average home price close to $500,000. DH's (low) 6 figure salary doesn't get us very far. There are towns here that have median salaries in the $150,000 range.

 

[Christine]

I get what you're saying and I totally understand where you're coming from.

The point I'm actually making is that I've worked in the OP's area. And you can live an hour away and not have to pay as much for a house or as much for groceries or as much for childcare or as much in property taxes and many other things.

I've done it. I've been there. I've worked in Northern Virginia because I would make more money there, more money than any business was offering locally. But I actually lived quite a distance away because I could take my Northern Virgina salary and live in a little known Maryland suburb which has an extremely low COL.

So, what I'm saying is that because the OP chooses to live 15 minutes away from her job for convenience sake instead of living an hour away, she's not "rich" when she could be.[/QUOTE]


Where the HECK did you get that I live 15 minutes away from my job in DC? I NEVER said that. Last time I checked, I lived 34 miles from my office--Prince William County, closer to Stafford. The last bastion of Northern Virginia.

 

[Christine]

If I made $50,000 where I live I would live the way you described what being poor would be. So by your definition would I be what you consider poor?

It's kind of sad really. I participate in a Northern Virginia forum and there are many people who come to the forum to post because they've just accepted some fantastic job making $42,000 and year (which from where they are from think is just wonderful) and they are trying to find out where they live. Not knowing the rental market, I usually just read those posts and not give advice; however, most always they are told that they cannot live in their own place on that salary in the DC/Virginia area. At this salary, it usually involved getting two other roommates to get an apartment or a rental townhome.

Then I read on the DIS that whole families are living really well of $50,000 in other parts of the country. It just astounds me.

 

[ScottJ]

$50,000 is the mean & sure it depends on where you live but a person in NY could choose to live in Manhattan or one of the other boroughs. I live O.K. on $50k, I could move (before my home lost its value) into a bigger home in a less desirable area. I CHOOSE to live in a nicer city with better schools. I could buy a car every 10 years instead of 5 years. We don't have to go out & eat.

A person who is making $100k & living above their means could downsize and live a much better lifestyle.

 

[Anewman]

I don't believe that the Cost Of Living in a certain area should dictate what classifies someone as "rich" or "poor."

Exactly, if someone owns a "small" 3 bedroom home in Malibu or Bel Air... it would still be Malibu or Bel Air.

Obviously not saying everyone in Malibu is rich, but we could be talking about a couple million while a home the same size in other parts of the country might be under 100k. If one can afford to live in HIGH RENT areas, they are not in the same economic class as those that need to live in LOW RENT districts.

 

[Bluestars]

I think a person is rich if he can pay for any want or need without having to work to do it. I don't think a person is rich if he has to work to pay his bills or pay for recreational things.

 

[luvmy3]

$50,000 is the mean & sure it depends on where you live but a person in NY could choose to live in Manhattan or one of the other boroughs. I live O.K. on $50k, I could move (before my home lost its value) into a bigger home in a less desirable area. I CHOOSE to live in a nicer city with better schools. I could buy a car every 10 years instead of 5 years. We don't have to go out & eat.

A person who is making $100k & living above their means could downsize and live a much better lifestyle.

I live 90 minutes North of NYC, many of my neighbors commute by MetroNorth into Manhattan everyday. They can't afford to live in any of the burroughs and its not because they are living above their means. Its not always as simple as choosing to downsize, especially when you have a family of 5 and you are living in a 3 bedroom under 2000 sq, ft home.

 

[Christine]

A good example is my in-laws. They were federal workers in DC, and lived in a Maryland suburb (PG county). My FIL was a GS-13, my MIL was a GS-7. They ended up getting transfers to Asheville, NC (this was the 90s). They took a small cut in pay as the COLA was reduced there. They said that they lived like kings in Asheville versus struggling in the DC area. It was good for them that they were able to get those jobs in Asheville--they had to wait almost 10 years for that transfer. Those jobs are few and far between.

 

[ReneeA]

I live 90 minutes North of NYC, many of my neighbors commute by MetroNorth into Manhattan everyday. They can't afford to live in any of the burroughs and its not because they are living above their means. Its not always as simple as choosing to downsize, especially when you have a family of 5 and you are living in a 3 bedroom under 2000 sq, ft home.

Wow, when I say tiny home...I mean tiny. We are a family of 4 living in a 700 square foot house with no basement and no garage.

Living in a 2000 sqare foot home is a palace to us...and it would definitely be living above our means.

The majority of people in this country live in homes much, much smaller than the one you do...and yes, I would consider them wealthy.

When you are posting on a board where it's common to visit WDW at least once a year, and lots and lots visit a few times a year, you are living a lifestyle that most in this country could not even fathom.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

According to the US Census Bureau, the median household income in the US in 2007 was $50,740. The state with the lowest median household income was Mississippi with a median of $36,338. The state with the highest median household income was Maryland with a median of $68,080.

I didn't find a complete zip code list, but this site lets you look up economic statistics by zip code. For the infamous 90210 zip code, the media household income in 1999 was $112,572. The median household in my suburban part of Texas (77382) was $104,372. For New York City, it was $38,293.

For better perspective, consider that the total income for the US equates to about $47,000 per person. The world average is just over $10,000 per person. I think that the "typical" person in the world would find it amusing that someone could afford access to the DIS Boards (implying computer ownership and Internet access and vacations to WDW) and not consider themselves rich. It's all relative. Compare with most people in history, we are all filthy rich. Compared with most people in the world today, we are almost all rich. Compared with people in America today, it's a mixed bag. Compared with people in America 100 years from now, we are probably all paupers.

Enjoy what you have. Work to enrich your life with the things that are important to you. Don't worry so much about what others have. You will always know someone richer ('cept you Bill) and you will always no someone poorer.

Oh, and quit trying to raise my taxes.

 

[Christine]

Wow, when I say tiny home...I mean tiny. We are a family of 4 living in a 700 square foot house with no basement and no garage.

Living in a 2000 sqare foot home is a palace to us...and it would definitely be living above our means.

The majority of people in this country live in homes much, much smaller than the one you do...and yes, I would consider them wealthy.

When you are posting on a board where it's common to visit WDW at least once a year, and lots and lots visit a few times a year, you are living a lifestyle that most in this country could not even fathom.

True.

In my area, I'm doubting one could even FIND a 700 square foot home to buy. They really just don't exist. My friend, who lived in one of the tiniest houses in this area had 1500 for her top and bottom levels.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Wow, when I say tiny home...I mean tiny. We are a family of 4 living in a 700 square foot house with no basement and no garage...

700 square feet is small in America, has always been.

The size of the average American home has more than doubled over the past half-century. The most recent statistics from the National Association of Home Builders show that the average American home grew from 983 square feet in 1950 to 2,434 square feet in 2005. In 1950, only one percent of homes built had four bedrooms or more, but 39 percent of new homes had at least four bedrooms in 2003. Garages have become almost obligatory, with only eight percent of new homes built without a garage, as opposed to 53 percent built without one in 1950.

The South is at the cutting edge of this trend, behind only the Northeast for the largest average size of new homes. In 2005, the average home built in the South was 2,436 square feet. This growth is attributed to many factors affecting the housing market and mainstream American culture.

link

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Wow, when I say tiny home...I mean tiny. We are a family of 4 living in a 700 square foot house with no basement and no garage.

Living in a 2000 sqare foot home is a palace to us...and it would definitely be living above our means.

The majority of people in this country live in homes much, much smaller than the one you do...and yes, I would consider them wealthy.

When you are posting on a board where it's common to visit WDW at least once a year, and lots and lots visit a few times a year, you are living a lifestyle that most in this country could not even fathom.

According to this, the average US home size is over 2,400 square feet. Of course, that's the average size of houses, not living spaces. I assume that once you throw in people living in apartments, condos, townhouses, trailers, cars, tents, and boxes, the median goes down a good bit. According to the appraisal district, it is 3,265 sq feet of indoor space and 667 sq feet of garage space. It's considered a pretty typical house (in size) amongst people I know around here.

 

[brerrabbit]

Before determining what defines rich yiu have to get on common ground and to many want to focus on income defining if your rich or not. My definition is based not on how much you make, but how much you keep. To me its all about wealth accumulation. A very conservative budget contentous family that makes $50k a year can be much wealthier than a Dr. or Lawyer making $250k a year. Peolple tend to live beyond their means and over extend themselves when they start making more money. I know I worked for Enron for seven years and dispite some good bonuses and a healthy income I did not buy a bigger house, a Porshe, of go on wild spending sprees. I worked with a lot of people that did. When it all came apart (I had fortunately left long before then) they were possesion long and cash poor. Even though I was not making the big bucks they were I had more wealth because I had not spent everything.

It's been around forever but it's still worth a read. Check out the Millionaire Next Door. The writer classifys people as either under, average, or over accumulators of wealth and he bases it on your net worth as a function of your annual income. The biggest paycheck does you no good when you loose your job, the company goes out of business, or you are struck with an accident or illness. At those times what counts is how much money do you have in the bank.

Accumulated wealth takes factors like where you live, etc out of the equation. Bottom line is if you could quit your job tomorrow and never work another day of your life and have enough money to do it at a life style you would accept, then you are rich. If not then like the majority of people in America today your not rich and just working to get there.

 

[Charade]

My definition of rich is when you make more from your investments than you do from your job.

Using your brain to make money is different than using your back?

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Using your brain to make money is different than using your back?

I have used both - I'd say so...

 

[mjkacmom]

$50,000 is the mean & sure it depends on where you live but a person in NY could choose to live in Manhattan or one of the other boroughs. I live O.K. on $50k, I could move (before my home lost its value) into a bigger home in a less desirable area. I CHOOSE to live in a nicer city with better schools. I could buy a car every 10 years instead of 5 years. We don't have to go out & eat.

A person who is making $100k & living above their means could downsize and live a much better lifestyle.

I personally can't think of how we could downsize that much. We are a family of 7, living in a 100 year old 1,800 square foot home. Our cars are 7 and 10 years old. We go out to eat a few times a year, order pizza in a few times a month, and rarely take vacations. The kids wear a lot of hand-me-downs. $100,000 a year gets you the same amount as $50,000 somewhere else. My property taxes are more each year than some people's mortgage payments.