Support NeoGAF

[Diatribe1974]

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?!

Once you start making a certain amount of money (not even close to what these folks make) you find yourself going "Hey, why the fuck not?" and trying shit you'd normally never think. I make almost 40k a year and since I went from 8.80$/hour to this, I've found myself already going "Hey, why the fuck not?" more than I've ever done.

 

[Conciliator]

I live financially independent and single with 50k in a manner that I consider relatively comfortable(I don't stress about money and save a lot). Honestly can't even fuckin imagine what I would do with $200k. I'd probably work for a year and then use the $160K I didn't spend just not working and going back to school for a few years. That would be sweet!

 

[Particle Physicist]

200k hah. They must have gold plated yachts! Private jets that run on diamonds!

Yeah 200k is not rich, not sure how old the people are who think it is or where they live, but 200k is solidly middle class here in the North East. It's a lot if you're single, you can live well, but it's in no way shape or form rich.

We make over 200k a year. I drive a Kia. My wife drives a Honda CRV. Please.

Top 5% is solidly middle class? That is some skewed up brackets you have there.

 

[travisbickle]

I don't see why.. it takes time, it truly does.

And shit happens.. and when shit happens to people with high incomes, they tend to pay out a lot more than other people.

I also paid much higher taxes than the average person most of that time.. and still do.

Bought a home in 2008.. my first home.. I was 29 years old.. a hard working young person. Do I get a $8,000 credit? Nope.. make too much money.

Do I even get to write off all of my interest? Nope.. make too much money.

I also supported my ex-wife for the 3 years I was married.. and then got divorced. Raped my finances far more than anyone making less money would have.

Income is higher, where you live tends to be more expensive.. setbacks tend to be greater, etc. Do I have a lot of emergency cash? Yes.. do I have a decent sized retirmement fund? Yes.

Still not "rich" IMO. And no, I'm not complaining about paying more taxes.. I support the concept.. but people do need to understand that unless you are a "business owner" or own a lot of property, people making ~100-200k from SKILLED LABOR do not enjoy the same benefits of the business owner "rich" people.

You do realise that in all the families in the OP article one of the adults run their own business. Only the single guy, who everyone says is living a crazy life, and the retired couple don't, but the retired couple sold their business and make their income from interest of assets.

They are rich.

 

[Cyan]

200k hah. They must have gold plated yachts! Private jets that run on diamonds!

Spend ridiculous amounts on wine and clothes! etc.

Yeah 200k is not rich, not sure how old the people are who think it is or where they live, but 200k is solidly middle class here in the North East. It's a lot if you're single, you can live well, but it's in no way shape or form rich.

Dude, even in NYC 200k is top 5% or greater. That ain't "solidly middle class" by my definition.

 

[Funky Papa]

Top 5% is solidly middle class? That is some skewed up brackets you have there.

Hey, going by that bizarre scale you could say that America is indeed a proletarian nation.

 

[Divvy]

Spend ridiculous amounts on wine and clothes! etc.


Dude, even in NYC 200k is top 5% or greater. That ain't "solidly middle class" by my definition.

According to Wikipedia's definition:

The upper class is the social class composed of the wealthiest members of society, who also wield the greatest political power. The upper class is generally contained within the wealthiest 1-2% of the population, and is distinguished by immense wealth (in the form of estates) which is passed from generation to generation

They are middle class because 200k will not buy you political power, nor are they in the top 1-2%. We will probably disagree but, I don't consider it "immense wealth" either.

 

[Conciliator]

According to Wikipedia's definition:



They are middle class because 200k will not buy you political power, nor are they in the top 1-2%. We will probably disagree but, I don't consider it "immense wealth" either.

Saying someone in the 95th percentile is not rich doesn't quite sit right with me. Wouldn't have to then conclude that someone in the 5th percentile isn't in poverty? If not, why is it different?

 

[Cyan]

They are middle class because 200k will not buy you political power, nor are they in the top 1-2%. We will probably disagree but, I don't consider it "immense wealth" either.

Fair enough. I don't consider it immense wealth by any stretch, but it's also not what I would call "solidly middle class."

Saying someone in the 95th percentile is not rich doesn't quite sit right with me. Wouldn't have to then conclude that someone in the 5th percentile isn't in poverty? If not, why is it different?

Why would it be symmetrical?

 

[TheExodu5]

Saying someone in the 95th percentile is not rich doesn't quite sit right with me. Wouldn't have to then conclude that someone in the 5th percentile isn't in poverty? If not, why is it different?

!rich != poor

 

[BobLoblaw]

why are people talking about college costs.

i'm at uni in the UK and will leave with a shit load of debt. and i fully intend to join the working world as soon as possible and pay it off.

fuck paying for your kids, if i have kids they can do exactly what i did. otherwise they'll end up exactly the same as all the other kids at my uni who get their tuition and accommodation paid for them, spoilt brats that are unable to budget.

Lol! My parents had five kids, had a mortgage, and credit card debt. Together they made probably $70-80,000. Know how much they saved up for our college education? $0. They knew they'd never be able to put all of us through college so they made sure we made good grades. And with those good grades I applied for scholarships and grants, which ended up paying 85% of my tuition at a local, private college. I'm not saying don't save money, but I don't plan on completely absolving my kids from any sort of financial responsibility for their higher education.

 

[Divvy]

Saying someone in the 95th percentile is not rich doesn't quite sit right with me. Wouldn't have to then conclude that someone in the 5th percentile isn't in poverty? If not, why is it different?

Because they are not analogous? There's a far greater proportion of people who can barely make ends meet and pay for basic human needs than there are rich people swinging their money around politics. Though to be fair, it's not like this isn't a fuzzy topic though.

Wiki's distinction between working class and middle class:

The cut-off between working class and middle class is more specifically where a population spends money primarily as a lifestyle rather than for sustenance (for example, on fashion versus merely nutrition and shelter). Problematically, relying on this method of distinction would rule out many of the people who are often identified as working class.

 

[Conciliator]

Fair enough. I don't consider it immense wealth by any stretch, but it's also not what I would call "solidly middle class."



Why would it be symmetrical?

If someone in the 94th percentile is in the 'middle', someone in the 6th percentile is in the 'middle'. Right? If that's not how it works, it seems like 'middle' is not an accurate word to describe it?

 

[TheExodu5]

My parents have a combined income of $150K and I paid for my own university. They're certainly nowhere near wealthy...they're only 1/4 of the way into paying off a $300K mortgage and are barely going to have enough to save for retirement.

In the first 10-15 years of their marriage, they were stuck in a rut where they couldn't afford a house and could just afford rent. Took a long time to be able to save up for a down payment for a house. The city is expensive.

 

[Conciliator]

!rich != poor

Obv, I'm not rich or poor.

 

[Cyan]

If someone in the 94th percentile is in the 'middle', someone in the 6th percentile is in the 'middle'. Right? If it that's not how it works, it seems like 'middle' is not an accurate word to describe it?

They're the "middle" because they're in between rich and poor.

The poor, as a group, have always been more numerous than the rich.

 

[Subprime]

Saying someone in the 95th percentile is not rich doesn't quite sit right with me. Wouldn't have to then conclude that someone in the 5th percentile isn't in poverty? If not, why is it different?

This is inane. Not rich doesnt mean poverty. What kind of diseased line of thought leads to ideas like this.

 

[Divvy]

If someone in the 94th percentile is in the 'middle', someone in the 6th percentile is in the 'middle'. Right? If that's not how it works, it seems like 'middle' is not an accurate word to describe it?

The term 'middle' is not based on proportion. It is based on things like economic status, spending habits, stability etc... But above all else it is basically the people who are neither working class, nor upper class.

 

[FStop7]

You're saying that a half million dollar windfall would be just barely enough to scrape by? That's asinine.

When you get that much money all at once, arguments about the area you live in become irrelevant. You could easily move to an area with a reasonable cost of living, buy a fantastic house for cash, get an awesome car, and put the rest to work in investments and you'd never have to work another day in your life.

Edit: I missed the part where you still owe money on your house. In that case, all you do is pay off your mortgage and put the rest into investments, and then you don't even have to move. You would probably still have to work, but since you wouldn't have a mortgage payment anymore you could get by easily.

You just called the hypothetical death of a man's wife a windfall.

God damn.

 

[Conciliator]

This is inane. Not rich doesnt mean poverty. What kind of diseased line of thought leads to ideas like this.

Not at all what I was saying, and not sure why you were unable to interpret it. Again, I am neither rich nor poor. I think there's other people like that too.

 

[Smelly Tramp]

Haha, I don't know where you got that, but I'm no lawyer (nor I like their trade).

I tried to start several business that failed to succeed and it caused me a big deal of suffering. There were stories of betrayal and plain incompetency but I was quick enough to fall back before all the bad shit happened, so I managed to keep my savings almost undented. After that I went for something safer and enslaved my ass until it took off.

Looking back I almost wish I had started a bakery :lol

the talk of clients made me think you were a lawyer. almost had a heart attack cause that's the profession I'm studying in!

 

[Subprime]

Not at all what I was saying, and not sure why you were unable to interpret it. Again, I am neither rich nor poor. I think there's other people like that too.

jesus. I totally misread it, sorry.

 

[Particle Physicist]

The same could be said about the people in here on a single income who don't make as much and live in a cheap place like Nebraska. There's a lot of ignorance going around and let's not pretend that it doesn't apply to those who don't make as much.

I'm married and live in Chicago.

 

[Dash27]

Spend ridiculous amounts on wine and clothes! etc.


Dude, even in NYC 200k is top 5% or greater. That ain't "solidly middle class" by my definition.

200k a year for a family is two people making 100 grand. That's middle management in a fairly large company in the tri state area. Sure if you're 22 living at home making 25k it sounds like infinite money, but they will learn soon enough. 200k here breaks you into maybe the low rung of upper middle class. Maybe.

Yeah you can grab a standard BWM 3 Series like every other person in the area, and spend money on dumb things like wine and clothes, but anyone with a brain is living beneath their means and saving for retirement and kids college funds, not to mention rainy day savings. That's on top of mortgage, 20k a year in property taxes, state and federal taxes, insurance, cars payments, plus the cost of living.

Like I said, we make over 200k combined and I drive a Kia Optima. Last year I was still in my 2001 Jetta. Comfortable yeah, rich no.

 

[12STS]

You just called the hypothetical death of a man's wife a windfall.

God damn.

Going by the raw definition of the word in this context, it was used correctly. The word itself does not possess any form of judgment as to the circumstances through which it occurs. Rather, a windfall is simply the sudden acquisition of a large sum of unexpected money.

 

[Slavik81]

Once you start making a certain amount of money (not even close to what these folks make) you find yourself going "Hey, why the fuck not?" and trying shit you'd normally never think. I make almost 40k a year and since I went from 8.80$/hour to this, I've found myself already going "Hey, why the fuck not?" more than I've ever done.

Yeah, over the past 7 years, my income has increased roughly sevenfold. I went from being paid minimum wage to an engineer's salary. It certainly changed my spending habits. I used to be much more frugal, and I'd never buy something so frivolous as a $5 Starbucks hot chocolate. I had no idea why anyone would buy such overpriced things. But, now I don't worry about it.

Minimum wage has increased 60% since then, but I'm sure the situation remains more or less the same. You need to be careful with your money at those income levels. It's a very different perspective.

 

[Liberty4all]

Do you consider having children and buying a house in a safe neighbourhood that will allow them to go to a decent public school a poor financial decision?

If you can't afford it, then yes it is a poor financial decision. Not living within your means.

With that said, family is more important than money ... Sacrificing your own financial well being may give your kids a leg up in life.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Because once you're making 150k should be able to invest it and the interest earned on it will quickly (< 15 years) move your income above 1 M. Once you get to 150k, it takes 0 effort to grow wealth.

Unless you spend it all on fine goods and services.

For someone making 150k, even if you live below your means and invest well, your yearly income will still not approach anywhere near 1M. You'd need a net worth of over 10 million, invest aggressively in stocks, and expect decent returns for that to happen.

 

[captive]

Because once you're making 150k should be able to invest it and the interest earned on it will quickly (< 15 years) move your income above 1 M. Once you get to 150k, it takes 0 effort to grow wealth.

Unless you spend it all on fine goods and services.

I'd like to know what bank is giving you such high interest rates, cause id like to sign up right now.

 

[Slayer-33]

I wish I had 10 mil the bank even if it was just making me 2% a year I'd be set for life.

Sucks man... :| Them more you make the closer you can get to that point but getting to that point unless you get incredibly lucky would be nearly impossible over a lifetime unless you can start some sort of business that's super successful. Or win the lottery ;|

 

[Cyan]

200k a year for a family is two people making 100 grand. That's middle management in a fairly large company in the tri state area. Sure if you're 22 living at home making 25k it sounds like infinite money, but they will learn soon enough. 200k here breaks you into maybe the low rung of upper middle class. Maybe.

Yeah, I'm sure if you're making that much money and are complete garbage at managing it, it doesn't seem like much, but someday when you grow up and learn to budget...

Is the random assholery really necessary?

Incidentally, I didn't pull that 5% out of my ass, I actually checked the numbers. Top 5% is just barely upper middle class? Come on now.

 

[Vanillalite]

Chris Rock: Rich VS. Wealthy

 

[Chumly]

200k hah. They must have gold plated yachts! Private jets that run on diamonds!

Yeah 200k is not rich, not sure how old the people are who think it is or where they live, but 200k is solidly middle class here in the North East. It's a lot if you're single, you can live well, but it's in no way shape or form rich.

We make over 200k a year. I drive a Kia. My wife drives a Honda CRV. Please.

Factually false

According to Wikipedia's definition:



They are middle class because 200k will not buy you political power, nor are they in the top 1-2%. We will probably disagree but, I don't consider it "immense wealth" either.

Wiki's definition:

They also give a variety of academic models:
Two giving upper middle class the definition of top 15 percent of earns (top 1 percent being elite). One giving top 5 percent as rich and 1 percent as super rich. At best you can argue that 200k is top end upper middle class. The middle class ranges or lower middle class ranges are not even close to what you are defining it as.

200k a year for a family is two people making 100 grand. That's middle management in a fairly large company in the tri state area. Sure if you're 22 living at home making 25k it sounds like infinite money, but they will learn soon enough. 200k here breaks you into maybe the low rung of upper middle class. Maybe.

Yeah you can grab a standard BWM 3 Series like every other person in the area, and spend money on dumb things like wine and clothes, but anyone with a brain is living beneath their means and saving for retirement and kids college funds, not to mention rainy day savings. That's on top of mortgage, 20k a year in property taxes, state and federal taxes, insurance, cars payments, plus the cost of living.

Like I said, we make over 200k combined and I drive a Kia Optima. Last year I was still in my 2001 Jetta. Comfortable yeah, rich no.

See above. Its not even close to being the low rung of upper middle class. Your views are completely distorted.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

I think people shouldn't be concerned about other peoples money. Worry about your own.

I know when I lived with my disabled dad and grandma we had 9-10,000 a year between the three of us. We were able to do/buy anything we wanted and never financially had any problems.

On the other hand my mom made 75+ and has trouble with every single bill.

 

[Divvy]

Factually false


Wiki's definition:

They also give a variety of academic models:
Two giving upper middle class the definition of top 15 percent of earns (top 1 percent being elite). One giving top 5 percent as rich and 1 percent as super rich. At best you can argue that 200k is top end upper middle class. The middle class ranges or lower middle class ranges are not even close to what you are defining it as.





See above. Its not even close to being the low rung of upper middle class. Your views are completely distorted.

I AM going by Wiki's definition:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_class#cite_note-0

I also never argued that they weren't upper middle class. That much should be obvious. But they are certainly not upper class. Not sure why you're bringing in US data when these are Canadian families.

 

[Mushroom021]

Damn, I wish I had a lot of money.

 

[Dash27]

Factually false


Wiki's definition:

See above. Its not even close to being the low rung of upper middle class. Your views are completely distorted.

Even if you want to use wiki, what's the first thing it says in your link?:

Social class in the United States is a controversial issue, having many competing definitions, models, and even disagreements over its very existence.

Second, you've apparently no concept of cost of living across the US, to base everyone on the same system is *fill in your adjective here*. NYC and it's suburbs are among the highest cost of living in the US and the world. Compare food, rent, services here with other areas and you'll quickly see how far your money goes. 100k in NYC or San Fran is far different from the same money in Tennessee or Utah, and even that has a wide local spectrum of wealth.

It's not even a discussion. If your opinion is that my neighborhood is your definition of rich because they make more than you, or whatever you criteria is, fine. Doesnt make it true but no point arguing with you, it's objectively false. By that same criteria the vast majority of the US is rich when compared on a world scale.



http://articles.nydailynews.com/200...new-yorkers-urban-future-expensive-urban-area

N.Y.C. so costly you need to earn six figures to make middle class
BY ELIZABETH HAYS
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Thursday, February 05, 2009

More than $2,000 a month for day care. Some of the highest phone bills in the country. Jam-packed, 50-plus-minute commutes to work.

You knew it was tough to live in New York City - but this tough?

A new report shows just how ugly - and expensive - New York City can be, especially for the middle class, squeezed by skyrocketing living costs and stagnant wages.

The study, released Thursday by the Center for an Urban Future, shows that New York City is hands-down the most expensive place to live in the country.

 

[12STS]

I'd like to know what bank is giving you such high interest rates, cause id like to sign up right now.

If your interpretation of investing is to put money in the bank, you've already lost.

 

[Chumly]

I AM going by Wiki's definition:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_class#cite_note-0

I also never argued that they weren't upper middle class. That much should be obvious. But they are certainly not upper class. Not sure why you're bringing in US data when these are Canadian families.

So you were purposely being obtuse in implying that they are middle class when in actuality your arguing about the fine line of TOP END upper middle class to upper class?



Also are you seriously going to try and bring me down on using the US data? Well I found some Canadian data just for you.

Canada's social class

The Upper Class

Perhaps 3-5% of Canadians fall into this class. Much of their wealth is inherited. Their children go to private schools and they exercise great power in occupational positions. Although this group has historically been primarily of British origin, it is now more widely distributed.

Upper-Upper Class
One percent belongs to an upper-upper class distinguished primarily by "old money."

Lower-Upper Class
The remaining 2-4% fall into the lower-upper class and depend more on earnings than inherited wealth. They are, for the most part, the "nouveau riche."

The Middle Class

Roughly 40-50% of the Canadian population falls into this category. Because of its size, it has tremendous influence on patterns of Canadian culture. There is considerable racial and ethnic diversity in this class and it is not characterized by exclusiveness and familiarity. The top half of this category is termed the "upper-middle" class with family incomes of $50,000 to $100,000 earned from upper managerial or professional fields. The rest of the middle class (average middles) typically works in less prestigious white-collar occupations or highly skilled blue-collar jobs. According to the Applying Sociology Box (p. 277) the middle class dominate the Calgary Stampede.

They are UPPER class . Like I said at best you could try and argue that it is at the very top end of upper middle class but to say they are middle class is completely disingenuous because it is not even close to the true middle class.

 

[Chumly]

Even if you want to use wiki, what's the first thing it says in your link?:



Second, you've apparently no concept of cost of living across the US, to base everyone on the same system is *fill in your adjective here*. NYC and it's suburbs are among the highest cost of living in the US and the world. Compare food, rent, services here with other areas and you'll quickly see how far your money goes. 100k in NYC or San Fran is far different from the same money in Tennessee or Utah, and even that has a wide local spectrum of wealth.

It's not even a discussion. If your opinion is that my neighborhood is your definition of rich because they make more than you, or whatever you criteria is, fine. Doesnt make it true but no point arguing with you, it's objectively false. By that same criteria the vast majority of the US is rich when compared on a world scale.



http://articles.nydailynews.com/200...new-yorkers-urban-future-expensive-urban-area

Sorry your moving goal posts so fast its hard to keep up with you. You originally said NORTHEAST which gives quite a wide range. Also the picture is just for show. The most important part is looking at the actual percentage ranges. To keep it simple you since you want to now argue the most expensive places in the US you can just apply the ranges to that area.

 

[FStop7]

Going by the raw definition of the word in this context, it was used correctly. The word itself does not possess any form of judgment as to the circumstances through which it occurs. Rather, a windfall is simply the sudden acquisition of a large sum of unexpected money.

M-W says "an unexpected, unearned, or sudden gain or advantage"

The death of your beloved spouse is not a gain

But that wasn't my point, anyway

 

[NeoUltima]

200k hah. They must have gold plated yachts! Private jets that run on diamonds!

Yeah 200k is not rich, not sure how old the people are who think it is or where they live, but 200k is solidly middle class here in the North East. It's a lot if you're single, you can live well, but it's in no way shape or form rich.

We make over 200k a year. I drive a Kia. My wife drives a Honda CRV. Please.

The debate over the word 'rich' is pointless. It's an opinion. I don't think 200k is 'rich' either, but I can understand someone disagreeing. But everyone should agree that 200k is very well off. If you make that much you shouldn't be stressing about money, unless you are an exuberant spender.

The point is the individuals in the OP make it seem like they are just scrapping by. That's what people find ridiculous.

Do you find yourself just scrapping by? How old are those cars you drive? Did you get them new or used? There are people that cannot even afford the luxury of owning a single automobile, Kia or not.

 

[Chumly]

I think the main problem is that people do not feel wealthy because there is always someone that is making more than them.

Fidelity Millionaire survey

42% of Millionaires Say They Won’t Feel Wealthy Until They Have More Than $7 Million

Thats all that really needs to be said. This was a survey of people with 1 million in liquid assets (does not include real estate or retirement accounts). People always feel significantly lower than what they actually are because they are always looking at the people above them.

 

[GaimeGuy]

If you're making 200k, you can easily be putting away 6 figures a year in savings.

I make basically exactly 1/3rd of 200k. Now, I live in Minnesota, with a rent of $735 a month.

But I am putting away roughly 30k in savings a year. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that even in NYC I'd still be putting 5 figures away every year. Add an extra 130, 140k before taxes? And consider the fact that even though income taxes would be slightly higher on that money, most of it would also not be taxes for social security, offsetting the income tax increases, there'd be about 90-100k remaining.... all of which I'd just be able to save since my necessities and leisures are already paid for.

That money can earn thousands in interest and returns every year for me. Which then earns interest and returns and is joined by another 100k the next year. Which earns interests and returns and so on....

200k a year should snowball into millions over a few decades. I'd definitely be able to retire at 40 (I'm 23 with no debt)

 

[Marty Chinn]

If you're making 200k, you can easily be putting away 6 figures a year in savings.

I make basically exactly 1/3rd of 200k. Now, I live in Minnesota, with a rent of $735 a month.

But I am putting away roughly 30k in savings a year. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that even in NYC I'd still be putting 5 figures away every year. Add an extra 130, 140k before taxes? And consider the fact that even though income taxes would be slightly higher on that money, most of it would also not be taxes for social security, offsetting the income tax increases, there'd be about 90-100k remaining.... all of which I'd just be able to save since my necessities and leisures are already paid for.

That money can earn thousands in interest and returns every year for me. Which then earns interest and returns and is joined by another 100k the next year. Which earns interests and returns and so on....

200k a year should snowball into millions over a few decades. I'd definitely be able to retire at 40 (I'm 23 with no debt)

I can't tell if you're serious or not after that last line....

 

[12STS]

I can't tell if you're serious or not after that last line....

If you can't turn an annual income of $200K into millions after a few decades, you really need to increase your financial acumen or at least hire a financial adviser to do it for you.

 

[GaimeGuy]

I can't tell if you're serious or not after that last line....

Dude, 130k saved up a year for 16-17 years? That's over 2 million principal. Budgeting for myself until the age of 90 gives me about 45k to work with every year. And that's without any returns or interest.

I'm not saying I would retire (I wouldn't), but if I wanted to, I could.

 

[TheExodu5]

Also are you seriously going to try and bring me down on using the US data? Well I found some Canadian data just for you.

Canada's social class




They are UPPER class . Like I said at best you could try and argue that it is at the very top end of upper middle class but to say they are middle class is completely disingenuous because it is not even close to the true middle class.

I don't agree with that site at all. Upper managerial and professional fields attributed to $50k-$100k income homes? You're looking for at least double that. According to that site, two elementary teachers in a household would be considered upper class. No way.

 

[gwarm01]

This thread has been fascinating to me for some reason. It made me realize you could learn a lot about a person, their views, and perhaps how they live their life just by asking them how much someone would have to make to be considered rich. I asked around 5 or 6 people that question today, and it was fun to see how their answers lined up with their personalities. It was interesting just how well their answers lined up with what I thought they would say too.

One friend lives a simple, country-style life. The girl drinks Bud Light, goes deer hunting, and has no desire to leave her small hometown. To her it would only take 100k to be rich. Luckily she's on track to pull that in.

Then there's my other friend whose family immigrated from Pakistan about ten years before she was born. Her dad pulls in 200k a year, she travels abroad yearly to Pakistan, and often enough to other places. She feels like you'd need 250k. Interesting but not unexpected that her idea of wealth has scaled with the activities she considers standard.

My wife thinks 100k is rich, whereas I would require 300k. It's kind of funny because whenever we go out to eat I will typically order a meal worth 3x what she chooses. The girl loves popcorn shirmp.

 

[teh_pwn]

I'd like to know what bank is giving you such high interest rates, cause id like to sign up right now.

I don't think it's typical to buy stock from banks.

You can look up a investor calculator, but just to make my point take a single $200,000 investment over 30 years at the market average of 9% return in low cost stock index funds:
1.09^30 * 200k ~= 2.6M. That's 100% of your time sitting on your ass. No effort. At all.

Find a calculator that puts 100k per year into a portfolio with 1.12x, which is as aggressive as you can get without just crazy speculative stuff (small cap, high dividend yield, low cost index funds)

I also never understood the term aggressive investing in stocks. Is it aggressive not to emotionally cave in to temporary reductions in purchasing power? To think that society won't collapse and that recessions are temporary? I suppose it is 2012.