Americans Set "Rich" Threshold at $150,000 in Annual Income

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2011 2:25 PM GMT
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/151427/Americans-Set-Rich-Threshold-150-000-Annual-Income.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=Business
    pb6ugzdyhk6wcswgbhuqcw.gif

    Of course, it's just the median, so you could still be somebody in the 11% who sets 1 million as the threshold to consider yourself rich.

    And it's entirely possible for you to consider a different threshold when considering somebody else rich.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2011 3:38 PM GMT
    I would not mentally apply the term "rich" below 300,000 per year.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2011 3:46 PM GMT
    to me, rich means:

    - having little or no debt (less than 10% of your total net worth)
    - your primary income is derived not from wages but from capital gains
    - you regularly qualify for AMT (alternative minimum tax) BUT can avoid it or leverage it down, because you pay CPAs and tax lawyers to minimize your tax burden

    - greater than $2M in annual gross receipts/investment income.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2011 3:47 PM GMT
    "Rich" is always 4x my salary.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2011 8:53 PM GMT
    AlphaTrigger saidto me, rich means:

    - having little or no debt (less than 10% of your total net worth)
    - your primary income is derived not from wages but from capital gains
    - you regularly qualify for AMT (alternative minimum tax) BUT can avoid it or leverage it down, because you pay CPAs and tax lawyers to minimize your tax burden

    - greater than $2M in annual gross receipts/investment income.


    Except for the first criteria, you're describing the super-rich, a smaller subset of the "rich."
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Dec 09, 2011 9:19 PM GMT
    It is hard to give a specific number, but if I had to pick a number, I would say I was rich if I had over $10 million in net assets. Living in California, I know many people that make more than $200k a year and I would not consider any of them wealthy. They are upper middle class. I would not lump the upper middle class with the wealthy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2011 9:22 PM GMT
    metta8 saidIt is hard to give a specific number, but if I had to pick a number, I would say I was rich if I had over $10 million in net assets. Living in California, I know many people that make more than $200k a year and I would not consider any of them wealthy. They are upper middle class. I would not lump the upper middle class with the wealthy.


    You should move to somewhere cheaper then.icon_lol.gif
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Dec 10, 2011 1:45 AM GMT
    You are not rich until your closet comprises at least 1,000 square feet.

    You are not rich until the value of any secondary residence has a value not over 1% of your net worth.

    You are not rich until you can decide how you are going to take your yearly income.

    You are not rich until you realize your love life is more important than anything material, but can take a 2-year vacation to think about it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2011 3:13 AM GMT
    comservativejock said...{bunch of implied braggy sounding criteria for being considered rich, which his case is probably quite true}



    I wonder what the definition of poor would be then - the average schmuck eking out $80 gross, or under?

    Oh, the horruh!