Who are the Rich?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
way higher than 110k

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure the 110K even equals upper middle class.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the person who said this would put you in the top 2% of earners is correct, then your statement is retarded.

Also income does not necessarily equate to class.

Mack

[SheetWise]

In the US we tend to live at or above our current income level, and the tax code promotes that behavior. Most people I know who make 100-150k are not rich, they're in debt. I never felt rich unless I had disposable income that I didn't "need" to support my current lifestyle -- which raises the threshold substantially, because the goal posts keep moving. If you can stay grounded in your lifestyle and move from 30k to 75k, you will "feel" rich. Using a yardstick with a worldview, everyone in the US is "rich". But that's not the yardstick we use.

[NobodysFreak]

My comment about 100k putting you in the top 2% was merely for income. Wealth and "richness" aren't just based on income. There's inherited wealth, property, stocks, bonds, and other assests that make a person rich. If I make 100k a year and spend 98k of it, I wouldn't be anywhere near rich and I don't even think I'd be upper middle class. I'd be damn near broke.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
[Reason gets inserted here, between these brackets]

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have a farm, Bush gave you a tax cut and eliminated crop subsidies and price supports.
If you are a student, Bush gave you a tax cut and cut your student loans.
If you are just a working stiff, Bush gave you a tax cut and you have higher unemployment, increased health care costs, it costs way more to drive to work ...

Of course if you are just a taxpayer ---
Bush gave you a tax cut, and saddled you with 100 billion in debt to pay for his war based on lies, gave you the bill to pay for the largest Govt. Agency created since 1940s, helped passed the biggest piece of pork called a "transportation bill".

But don't worry, he gave you a tax cut and he is working on screwing you out of your social security and chopping your medicare.

[Rooster71]

It seems odd that your poll classifies "rich" by annual income. Also your figures are way, way low. I believe in the saying "it's not what you make, it's what you keep". With that said, I would loosely define "rich" as having more than $1M in assets.

[jesusarenque]

[ QUOTE ]
My comment about 100k putting you in the top 2% was merely for income. Wealth and "richness" aren't just based on income. There's inherited wealth, property, stocks, bonds, and other assests that make a person rich. If I make 100k a year and spend 98k of it, I wouldn't be anywhere near rich and I don't even think I'd be upper middle class. I'd be damn near broke.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I made $5,000,000,000 but spend $4,999,999,999 of it, I wouldn't be anywhere near rich.

[ripdog]

Yeah, I can't vote here. WAY higher than $110. Maybe $500,000 though I could imagine being able to blow through that and still not have everything I think would be cool now.

[LargeCents]

I think he's trying to get us to guess his income, based on the information he gives about himself before the poll question. Talk about a stupid poll.

"Rich" is all about net worth. Income is only one of many variables needed to determine one's net worth.

The rich are usually white people who were allowed to break the law and make money at others' expense. Back in the day when liqour was illegal, the whiteys were allowed to tacitly break the law and "bootleg" it. This is how the Keneedy family built its fortune. Today, when a black man "bootlegs" cocaine, he is labeled as a drug dealer who preys on little kids and thrown in jail for 20 years.

So basically the rich are those white people who were allowed to break the law the longest.

[Khern]

I agree with rich= high net worth.

About 10 years ago, I remember a survey being given out that asked people, "Do you feel rich." People started answering yes at around 5 million. So, add a little for inflation, and you have my answer.

John