Support NeoGAF

[oneils]

I feel bad for the people in the article. Because I can bet that when they were approached they probably were not told that they were going to be held up as examples of top income earners "struggling." I can just see it, now.

Toronto Life probably just told them that they wanted to develop profiles of some high income families in their magazine to give their readers a better understanding of what their lifestyle is like. So, could you give us some basic info on your budget? Sure!

Next thing they know, Toronto Life is splashing them all over their site as an example of "why rich is never rich enough."

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

Ostensibly, many of us could quickly become wealthy if our income jumped from what it is now to $200k or more and our expenses remained the same. But we have to be careful not to see everyone else through the filter of our own lives. I would love to make that much, but I would probably also increase my standard of living. That would make it seem like so much less than it really is.

Which is fucking retarded, I'm sorry.

-Get in $80,000 car
-Drive to expensive restaurant
-Eat $200 meal
-Buy $100 bottle of wine
-Do this twice a week

"Sure, I'm making $200,000 a year but my cost of living is higher so it's not like I'm rich!"

That's the whole fucking point of money: you buy nice shit with it. The judgment of how valuable your income is shouldn't be how much bigger your bank account is at the end of the month but what you're able to do with it.

 

[Neo C.]

It's really stunning to me how worked up people get over other people's money. It's kind of gross.

Be happy that the poor people in NA haven't done any serious riots yet.

 

[Divvy]

I feel bad for the people in the article. Because I can bet that when they were approached they probably were not told that they were going to be held up as examples of top income earners "struggling." I can just see it, now.

Toronto Life probably just told them that they wanted to develop profiles of some high income families in their magazine to give their readers a better understanding of what their lifestyle is like. So, could you give us some basic info on your budget? Sure!

Next thing they know, Toronto Life is splashing them all over their site as an example of "why rich is never rich enough."

Yup. All of the editorializing is done by the douchey writer.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

People who have bitch much more than than people who have not.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I've never even been to a real concert.

Or vegas.

Or owned a suit.

Or drank a $100 bottle of wine.

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?!

Unless you're posting from the library/school/friend/relatives house I don't wanna hear it. If ya got cash for a computer and an internet connection then you can buy a suit, lol.

 

[kaioshade]

Some of the comments here make me sick. I make a fraction of that, have a modest 1 bedroom apartment, an old POS car. Meager lifestyle. i eat out MAYBE once a week, maybe see a movie once every two weeks. Other than its brown bagging my lunch every day and watching movies on netflix. I have my gaming, but hardly some huge collection. its a luxury.

200k is not comfortable, thats straight fucking rich.

 

[jmdajr]

Unless you're posting from the library/school/friend/relatives house I don't wanna hear it. If ya got cash for a computer and an internet connection then you can buy a suit, lol.

A suite is not going to cost you an arm and a leg. You have options.

I think houses and cars can be huge money pits. You have to be careful. But if you have kids and want them to go to a decent school, you will most likely have to live in a good neighborhood and that costs money. Just the way it is.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

200k a year for household income isn't rich. But it's upper middle class and comfortable.

 

[Stet]

Why even bother having the adjective "rich" if it can't be used to describe anyone but the top 0.01% of earners? I live in Toronto and I grew up in the upper-middle class while going to a private school with kids that were filthy rich. I dated the daughter of a director who once told me that they were "poor" whenever her dad wasn't making films because they had no income. Rich people are just as deluded as the rest of us about what they make. They think they're hard done by because there are people who make more money than them and ignore all the people who make less.


If you're making more than 99% of the population in the country, you're rich. That's all there is to it. There's no way you can say that it's "too hard to live" on 200k when 99% of the population lives on less.

 

[Divvy]

Why even bother having the adjective "rich" if it can't be used to describe anyone but the top 0.01% of earners? I live in Toronto and I grew up in the upper-middle class while going to a private school with kids that were filthy rich. I dated the daughter of a director who once told me that they were "poor" whenever her dad wasn't making films because they had no income.


If you're making more than 99% of the population in the country, you're rich. That's all there is to it. There's no way you can say that it's "too hard to live" on 200k when 99% of the population lives on less.

Again, nobody has said this. What they have said is that they are still budgeting their money and can't spend it willy nilly.

 

[Stet]

Again, nobody has said this.

The people in the article have said they're "just making it" which indicates that they think it's pretty damn hard.

 

[Alucrid]

Why even bother having the adjective "rich" if it can't be used to describe anyone but the top 0.01% of earners? I live in Toronto and I grew up in the upper-middle class while going to a private school with kids that were filthy rich. I dated the daughter of a director who once told me that they were "poor" whenever her dad wasn't making films because they had no income. Rich people are just as deluded as the rest of us about what they make. They think they're hard done by because there are people who make more money than them and ignore all the people who make less.


If you're making more than 99% of the population in the country, you're rich. That's all there is to it. There's no way you can say that it's "too hard to live" on 200k when 99% of the population lives on less.

I think it was posted here that 200k is the top 2-3%.

 

[dave is ok]

$200K/year does not make one rich. Well off, yes, but not rich.

It always irks me when Obama mentions his plan to tax the "rich" at incomes of $250K and up.

Then we should add more tax brackets. The final one starts at 300k-ish or something.

 

[Divvy]

The people in the article have said they're "just making it" which indicates that they think it's pretty damn hard.

That is not "too hard to live." That is, "our expenses are catching up to our budget."

 

[Nemo]

I'm not so sure this is a case of "keeping up with the Jones'". They're being honest/realistic.

It's cool they're honest and keeping to a budget, whatever that budget may be. But if these people had to go a step lower in their lifestyle it would seriously fuck with their minds. I know a guy who was in a similar situation. If they live by a yearly budget of 1 million a year and the next year they had to downsize to 500 large they'd feel depressed, and that's not realistic, definitely not when you're in the top 1%. They feel as if their world come crumbling down by going to a house half the size (which would still be huge for the rest of the world). And I get that you get so used to it that it becomes normal, but it's not realistic.

 

[Stet]

That is not "too hard to live." That is, "our expenses are catching up to our budget."

If I was able to buy what I wanted and my expenses were simply "catching up to" my budget, I wouldn't call it "just making it." I'd call it "living comfortably with no real financial issues."

 

[Divvy]

If I was able to buy what I wanted and my expenses were simply "catching up to" my budget, I wouldn't call it "just making it." I'd call it "living comfortably with no real financial issues."

And yet none of the families said they were "just making it."

 

[The Technomancer]

If I was able to buy what I wanted and my expenses were simply "catching up to" my budget, I wouldn't call it "just making it." I'd call it "living comfortably with no real financial issues."

Sure, alright. But neither of those is "rich". Rich is not "we took the family to Vegas last year for vacation", rich is "I flew down to Vegas last week because I felt like it"

 

[Vicetrailia]

Well they certainly aren't "just making it".

They can dial back at anytime and "Make it".

 

[Deleted member 81567]

Yeah, the recession has lowered your guys standards for the term "rich".

 

[kaioshade]

Yeah, the recession has lowered your guys standards for the term "rich".

Umm no, being SENSIBLE lowered it.

 

[Stet]

Sure, alright. But neither of those is "rich". Rich is not "we took the family to Vegas last year for vacation", rich is "I flew down to Vegas last week because I felt like it"

And who set these definitions? This is the problem with the first world these days, even the poor are fantasizing about living beyond their means. What's the problem with calling someone who makes that much "rich"?


I can't figure the people in this thread out, because they're defending out of control spending as if they have first-hand knowledge of it.

 

[JzeroT1437]

$200k with kids, in an expensive city, trying to balance responsibilities like good schools/daycare and wants like travel and fun; I get it. I grew up in similar circumstances.

You can never really have enough money to do 100% of everything you'd like to and there's always someone richer. I'd never agree to do an article like this, though. That's just stupid.

I live alone in NYC on $45k/year and some months I have plenty, other months barely enough to coast by. I can see a large family needing around $200k to get by in NYC. Kids are expensive.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Ostensibly, many of us could quickly become wealthy if our income jumped from what it is now to $200k or more and our expenses remained the same. But we have to be careful not to see everyone else through the filter of our own lives. I would love to make that much, but I would probably also increase my standard of living. That would make it seem like so much less than it really is.

I think everyone here is aware of why these people don't feel rich, but it comes off as insensitive and callous. It's "Let them eat cake", you know?

It's like how when an 8 year old's goldfish dies, it really does break her heart and she is a wreck for a week and she probably has to take time off school and stuff. That's very real, to her. It would be totally wrong to say that she's lying if she rates that as a 10/10 trauma event or if she says it's the end of the world.

But with the benefit of perspective and the sensitivity to how the rest of the world lives, it would be WILDLY inappropriate to come into work in hysterics, crying about your goldfish when your coworker's wife is in brain surgery and the next round of layoffs is probably going to cost him his job since his performance has declined because of the medical stuff they've been going through.

Someone at this level of wealth enjoys many creature comforts even if they don't realize or fully appreciate that. While they might not be aware of the degree to which their standard of living has acclimatized to their income, if they were forced by dire peril to cut expenses they easily could. They could live like I live... and I live very well. Hell, if it came to it, I could live like a member of the working poor or like an unemployed student.

This doesn't mean everyone in the world needs to be monastic and live in awe of the fact that they aren't a starving sub-Saharan, but it does mean two key things: 1) You should probably be careful about how you come off when you're complaining, whether you're complaining directly or lobbying for certain policies politically, and 2) You should be mindful of the fact that the things you have are not things that everyone has and so some humility and grace is in order in terms of how you carry yourself.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

I can't figure the people in this thread out, because they're defending out of control spending as if they have first-hand knowledge of it.

“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” -John Steinbeck

 

[Divvy]

And who set these definitions? This is the problem with the first world these days, even the poor are fantasizing about living beyond their means. What's the problem with calling someone who makes that much "rich"?


I can't figure the people in this thread out, because they're defending out of control spending as if they have first-hand knowledge of it.

But you just called it "living comfortably with no real financial issues." Now it's out of control spending?

People are defending them because others are a) putting words into their mouths and b) they actually haven't done anything wrong yet are receiving all this vitriol.

 

[Subprime]

200k is FAR from being rich, after taxes 1/2 is gone anyway. I live in Manhattan, and if you're making 200k an year you're not even middle class


I wouldn't consider someone "rich" unless they were pulling 750K+

"not even in the middle class"

Have fun with your glass house.

also: its not about how much you actually make, its about how much more/less you make than other people in your community. IF you make 50K a year in a place with a mean income of 40K a year, you feel wealthy so you feel better about it. It's all relative. That said, I think these people are fools that lack any real perspective. Anyone who buys a mercedes every three years is rich. End of story.

 

[Stet]

But you just called it "living comfortably with no real financial issues." Now it's out of control spending?

People are defending them because others are a) putting words into their mouths and b) they actually haven't done anything wrong yet are receiving all this vitriol.

I called your simple hypothetical example of "expenses are catching up to income" that. If you temper that with the fact that they're spending $800 on wine, they're spending out of control.

 

[SteveMeister]

I still say they're not rich. Rich, to me, has always meant having more money than you know what to do with. You don't have to work, you choose to (or not to). Your investments keep your income so high that a salary would be meaningless. You can afford multiple expensive homes, exotic cars, unlimited travel at the highest levels of luxury, etc.

These people are doing very well, better than most. But they still have to watch what they do. And in the case of the couples, if they're relying on two incomes and one suddenly goes away, they may suddenly see themselves living way beyond their means. That is NOT rich. Rich people don't have to worry about things like that.

See the difference?

 

[Stet]

I still say they're not rich. Rich, to me, has always meant having more money than you know what to do with. You don't have to work, you choose to (or not to). Your investments keep your income so high that a salary would be meaningless. You can afford multiple expensive homes, exotic cars, unlimited travel at the highest levels of luxury, etc.

These people are doing very well, better than most. But they still have to watch what they do. And in the case of the couples, if they're relying on two incomes and one suddenly goes away, they may suddenly see themselves living way beyond their means. That is NOT rich. Rich people don't have to worry about things like that.

See the difference?

That's funny, because to a person who lives just above the poverty line and gets to shop at a food bank, even having two incomes would probably be considered rich.

 

[NervousXtian]

200k family income isn't rich, it's upper middle class and very comfortably well off.

 

[Divvy]

I called your simple hypothetical example of "expenses are catching up to income" that. If you temper that with the fact that they're spending $800 on wine, they're spending out of control.

Why is he not allowed to spend that much on wine if can afford it? Out of control spending would be if he was spiralling into debt, yet still chose to spend that much of his income on pleasure.

 

[SteveMeister]

That's funny, because to a person who lives just above the poverty line and gets to shop at a food bank, even having two incomes would probably be considered rich.

Not by my definition. That's the point. Can people with two incomes, bringing in $200k, not ever have to worry about money? Perhaps if they live like the person just above the poverty line. But they won't. They'll spend the money, and often as not get into a position where if that income shrinks, they could find themselves in trouble.

Again, the truly rich don't have to worry about that sort of thing.

 

[Subprime]

Rich:

" Having a great deal of money or assets; wealthy. "

Not sure why people are trying to make a distinction between rich and wealthy.

 

[Stet]

Why is he not allowed to spend that much on wine if can afford it? Out of control spending would be if he was spiralling into debt, yet still chose to spend that much of his income on pleasure.

Ugh, if only he didn't "lose so much of it to tax" he'd be able to afford to eat at North 44 more often.

 

[kaioshade]

I have a feeling people who say 200k is not rich has grown up with that kind of a privileged lifestyle and its normal to them.

 

[oneils]

I still say they're not rich. Rich, to me, has always meant having more money than you know what to do with...

I'm just focussing on this part of the post. Not to criticize. Just to say that if that were my definition of rich then I would have to be a billionaire. I would have a pretty good idea of what to do with my money if I had about a few hundred million dollars.

I think I would only run out of ideas at about a billion.

 

[jmdajr]

Remember when MC hammer was rich?

 

[LosDaddie]

$200k isn't "rich", but I'll be damned if that amount of income isn't pretty fucking good. The vast majority of families would live very comfortably with that income.

Problem is that when people get to that income, they start spending it on stuff they didn't used to before. EAting out at nice places a (at least) few times a week, drive really nice cars, travel a bunch, host more parties....it all adds up quickly.

 

[Divvy]

Ugh, if only he didn't "lose so much of it to tax" he'd be able to afford to eat at North 44 more often.

So he should just sit on that money instead of returning it to the economy through spending?

 

[Alucrid]

I have a feeling people who say 200k is not rich has grown up with that kind of a privileged lifestyle and its normal to them.

Nope.

 

[Liberty4all]

But you just called it "living comfortably with no real financial issues." Now it's out of control spending?

People are defending them because others are a) putting words into their mouths and b) they actually haven't done anything wrong yet are receiving all this vitriol.

I think some people are irked with the case study families due in part to the way they say things. Like the family that spends 400 a month on wine but it's "oh so hard to find the 11 dollar cheap bottles"

Or the senior that "treats" himself to an 80k car ... Every three years.

It's the way they say it ... Like as if it's normal. And the tone of some of those families is that things are tight, it's not as easy as people think.

Combine that with the article writer smugly saying see 200k isn't rich .... Meanwhile most of us are lucky to take home 100k (or much less). I'm sorry but these families problems are ridiculous and to the rest of the world they broke the cardinal rule.... Don't talk about your money. They THINK their finances are normal which only infuriates people more.

 

[JGS]

I have a feeling people who say 200k is not rich has grown up with that kind of a privileged lifestyle and its normal to them.

200k is not normal (Neither is living in poverty although the numbers are higher. It is easier to attain poorness after all.), it's just not rich.

When my family makes 200k a year, we wouldn't consider ourselves rich either. That part of the whackiness of the article. The article not only tries to explain that these non-rich people are rich, they actually expect them to think that they are rich.

I know millionaires (Asset wise) who don't think their rich because they still have to work to maintain their what they've got- they would be hurting if they stopped working. It doesn't dawn on them that they are in the same category as a billionaire or a celebrity. I think they're largely wrong, but I also get why they wouldn't think of themselves that way.

 

[kaioshade]

Nope.

Enlighten me then. I did not grow up taking vacations whenever, and i certainly was not eating out multiple times a week, or drinking wine. My mother did not have 3 cars, and the car she did have certainly was not luxury (Mazda 323). So yea, 200K is a ridiculous amount of money.

 

[Stet]

So he should just sit on that money instead of returning it to the economy through spending?

Yeah, that $10,000 he spends in Vegas provides a lot of economic dollars for the people of Canada.

 

[JGS]

World Economy. They should have had gangsters to build a Canadian Vegas.

 

[The Technomancer]

I have a feeling people who say 200k is not rich has grown up with that kind of a privileged lifestyle and its normal to them.

Actually I grew up in a 120k-ish lifestyle in Wisconsin, and (I've said this before) if our living conditions are to be considered "rich" then something is fucking wrong. We were comfortable. We didn't have to literally worry that we couldn't pay the heat at the end of the month. We could afford a big family vacation every two or three years. We could afford the fresh ingredients for my parents to make a lot of good meals, and we could afford to send me and my siblings to private elementary school (although all three of us went/will go to public school for grades 6-12). It was still a big deal when my parents finally bought a new TV after ten years. My dad still had to build most of our back porch by himself. We had to lease our cars for the longest time before we finally got in a position to buy one.

Except maybe for the school thing the conditions that I grew up in should be the standard for a hard working middle class family. The fact that it's not, the fact that statistically we are actually in the top 15% of the country, is ridiculous.

 

[Neo C.]

Sure, alright. But neither of those is "rich". Rich is not "we took the family to Vegas last year for vacation", rich is "I flew down to Vegas last week because I felt like it"

Yeah, the recession has lowered your guys standards for the term "rich".

I think this is a huge cultural discrepancy. The standard of living you're calling rich would be a gross understatement in my environment - and some of my friends are quite wealthy.

 

[commish]

I know first-hand that it's very hard to live on $200k a year. It seems like a lot, but it's not.