Do you consider a family that makes >$100,000 wealthy?

[indygirl99]

We have a roof over our head, food in our refrigerator, a car in the garage that has gas in it and a job to go to tomorrow that provides health insurance.

Are we wealthy? You bet. Do we make 100K Nope.

 

[AddictedtoDoleWhip]

Where I live $100,000 is not really considered wealthy. I mean maybe if as a household both people who live together make 100,000 each a year which would equate to 200,000 a year.. I'd say they are comfortable but not wealthy.

 

[bcwife76]

I live in the most expensive city in Canada (and probably North America), Vancouver BC. OK technically I live 40 minutes east of downtown, out in the suburbs. But still. The average price of a home in Vancouver is approx $800,000CDN. $100,000 is NOT wealthy here. We make a little less than $100K (because I'm a SAHM) so if (when)I went back to work we'd be over the $100K mark. Still not wealthy. Just a bit more comfortable than we are now. We're comfortable now but our kids are young and we need to put more money towards their education funds and one of cars is about to die so since I will have 2 kids in school full time in September it's time for me to bring some $ back in the house ;-) But I digress....

 

[Planogirl]

That amount is way about the median income in Texas. I would say that to some people it would seem like wealth while others would think that it's a paltry sum. Plus this is very dependent on location.

 

[smitch425]

Nope. Nowhere near wealthy. Somewhat comfortable in some places, but in others, not so much.

 

[barkley]

It's laughable that anyone would think 100k is wealthy......The people that I know who are genuinely wealthy would laugh at what a 100k earner would consider a "luxury purchase"......Hint: your used Lexus or c class Mercedes ain't it.

I would be interested in knowing how much these 'genuinely wealthy' own outright as well as manage to actually long term 'save' of their income vs. those who they would judge on the basis of their choice of a luxury purchase.

it's all well and fine to earn much more but if that person/household is indebted for their home, car loans and other expenses I suspect that the persons I personally know who earn no more than/approximately $100,000 but have managed through responsible long and short term spending decisions to be entirely debt free such that they can save 50% of their gross income annually may be in a far better financial situation than those we so frequently read of for whom a job loss or other financial downturn immediately results in repossessions, financial defaults and bankruptcy.

 

[DopeyDame]

It's laughable that anyone would think 100k is wealthy......The people that I know who are genuinely wealthy would laugh at what a 100k earner would consider a "luxury purchase"......Hint: your used Lexus or c class Mercedes ain't it.

It's laughable that anyone would think 100k isn't wealthy. The people that I know who are genuinely not wealthy would laugh at what a 100k earner would consider a "necessary purchase"... Hint: your cable, dinners out, and $200 haircut ain't it.

 

[Christine]

along the same lines-fully funding (or in large part) kid's college. growing up despite knowing some kids from what I viewed (then and now) as coming from solid upper middle class earning families it still wasn't the norm for their parents to fully fund their college expenses, AND absolutely wasn't heard of among the 'middle class'. a parent might help out w/the student's expenses by contributing a stipend towards the cost (or mom bought extra groceries/made frozen meals to send home to their apartment when they came home to visit once or twice a month) but the only folks we knew that had their educations paid in full by family were the uber wealthy or those w/inheritances or trust funds from passed on family members. it was the norm vs. the exception that students were working jobs while attending school.

so much of what people take for granted as being the 'norm' in day to day life are things that I view as luxuries. for us anything beyond housing/food/utilities/insurance-home, health/ life and car/basic clothing/basic transportation is all just icing on the cake. sure, we opt for some of that icing but if we had to do without it I wouldn't see it as a loss of anything we need.

I actually think it was very normal (and easier) back then. My mom was a bank teller, my dad a police officer. We lived in a tiny, little house in a somewhat rural town outside a city. All of my friends and myself with similar backgrounds had our college educations paid for. Granted, these were state and community colleges and very affordable at the time.

 

[Jdbsfw]

It's laughable that anyone would think 100k isn't wealthy. The people that I know who are genuinely not wealthy would laugh at what a 100k earner would consider a "necessary purchase"... Hint: your cable, dinners out, and $200 haircut ain't it.

That's because they (and you) are ignorant of how much expendable income the truly wealthy I'm talking about have

 

[Christine]

That's because they (and you) are ignorant of how much expendable income the truly wealthy I'm talking about have

Agreed. $100K is far from 'wealthy' but I guess it depends on your definition of 'wealthy.' For me is rolling in bucks so you don't have to worry about anything you need to spend be it vacations, home improvements, etc. Wealthy allows you to not think about throwing money toward extras. Necessities are all very well met.

 

[DisneyNutMary]

In A borough of NYC, making $100k is far from wealthy.
We have a small house, two kids- one just out of college, one going in, two cars (necessary based on where we work) and we sometimes feel like we are drowning. Between taxes, utilities, tolls and gas back and forth to work, cell phone plans, and the cost of groceries, some weeks we barely get to the end of the week before we get to the end of the paycheck.

 

[DopeyDame]

That's because they (and you) are ignorant of how much expendable income the truly wealthy I'm talking about have

Nope. That's not it at all. It's because I have some perspective and compassion. Just because you're not "THE WEALTHIEST" of people on the planet doesn't mean that you aren't wealthy. Is Tom Brady the only "athletic" person on the planet? Of course not. Just because you're not at the tippy-tippy top of some mountain doesn't mean that you aren't in the "wealthy" category.

And frankly, the entitlement and lack of perspective on this thread is making my physically ill.

From my point of view, if you are richer than 0.1% of the people on the planet, you're wealthy. (And yes, that's where people who make $100K a year fall)
If you have never had to worry about where your next meal will come from or if you have a roof over your head or if you will have the means to stay healthy, you're wealthy. Being able to buy a 4.8 million dollar car (http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/the-top-ten-most-expensive-cars-in-the-world/3/) may put you in a different category than someone who can buy a current year Honda, but the person with a Honda is still wealthy compared to virtually every other person on the planet, and most other people in the country.

 

[smiths02]

I haven't read all responses....
But I don't consider someone wealthy based on their income, but rather based on the wealth they have accumulated.
Just as a hypothetical: You could have student loan debt, an underwater rental property, a small amount of credit card debt, two kids in daycare (3 kids total)...this could be your first year making over $100K...are these people wealthy? Not really, by the time they pay taxes, basic bills, insurances (life, disability, health, car, etc), a little retirement savings, and service their debts...there might not be much money to speak of

Now, if you make that much consistently for several years, you should be comfortable but not "rich" necessarily

 

[alicat8]

No way, not here! We're just over that between the 2 of us. Where we are, I'd consider us on the extreme low end of middle class.

 

[mjkacmom]

Sorry! I wasn't clear... I'm not saying *we* personally HAVE to have all that... I was saying that we as a society seem to think we have to have all that... I was agreeing w/ another poster that all "that" (whatever that is) has become a typical part of the middle class - where it wasn't decades ago.

We don't have the latest electronics, but we do have electronics - phones, video game systems, laptop, etc. We don't have a TV in every room of the house, but we do have more than one TV.

I don't have a designer handbag, but I know many, many other women in our circle who do & they're not wealthy - they're part of the same middle class that we are. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong w/ having a designer handbag. (I have my eye on a kicky little Kate Spade.) But I guess my money goes to my hair. LOL!

And the $200 includes the cut, color, style, & tip... it's pretty typical for this area. And, yes, I think it's expensive. Which is why I said, if I were wealthy, I wouldn't think a thing about it! LOL!

$200 for cut, color, style, and tip is CHEAP! I go out of town to a cheaper area and pay $230, not including tip. I just couldn't justify paying more at the 30 or so salons here in town.

 

[Bec3b1g]

Nope. That's not it at all. It's because I have some perspective and compassion. Just because you're not "THE WEALTHIEST" of people on the planet doesn't mean that you aren't wealthy. Is Tom Brady the only "athletic" person on the planet? Of course not. Just because you're not at the tippy-tippy top of some mountain doesn't mean that you aren't in the "wealthy" category.

And frankly, the entitlement and lack of perspective on this thread is making my physically ill.

From my point of view, if you are richer than 0.1% of the people on the planet, you're wealthy. (And yes, that's where people who make $100K a year fall)
If you have never had to worry about where your next meal will come from or if you have a roof over your head or if you will have the means to stay healthy, you're wealthy. Being able to buy a 4.8 million dollar car (http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/the-top-ten-most-expensive-cars-in-the-world/3/) may put you in a different category than someone who can buy a current year Honda, but the person with a Honda is still wealthy compared to virtually every other person on the planet, and most other people in the country.

I'm sure if the question was--is 100k wealthy compared to everyone in the world, answers would have been different.

 

[Christine]

Nope. That's not it at all. It's because I have some perspective and compassion. Just because you're not "THE WEALTHIEST" of people on the planet doesn't mean that you aren't wealthy. Is Tom Brady the only "athletic" person on the planet? Of course not. Just because you're not at the tippy-tippy top of some mountain doesn't mean that you aren't in the "wealthy" category.

And frankly, the entitlement and lack of perspective on this thread is making my physically ill.

From my point of view, if you are richer than 0.1% of the people on the planet, you're wealthy. (And yes, that's where people who make $100K a year fall)
If you have never had to worry about where your next meal will come from or if you have a roof over your head or if you will have the means to stay healthy, you're wealthy. Being able to buy a 4.8 million dollar car (http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/the-top-ten-most-expensive-cars-in-the-world/3/) may put you in a different category than someone who can buy a current year Honda, but the person with a Honda is still wealthy compared to virtually every other person on the planet, and most other people in the country.

As you stated, that's your definition of wealthy. From my POV, if you never have to worry about your next meal and you have a home, that makes you solidly middle class. Not wealthy. Wealthy is rich, to me. Wealthy, to me, is someone who never has to worry about ANY expense they have to make or juggle the priorities about getting one thing over another.

Your definition of wealthy seems to be that you can just manage to eat and not get exposed to the elements at night when you lay your head down to sleep. That's just "makin' it" to me.

No one is right or wrong. I guess, with threads like these, before people vote, we should agree on some standard definition of wealthy.

 

[DopeyDame]

I'm sure if the question was--is 100k wealthy compared to everyone in the world, answers would have been different.

I don't understand who else we would compare things to? There are no people on other planets. And as I said, even if you limit your comparison to people in the US (not sure why you would do that, but ok...), even then, someone who can easily meet all of their needs every day is wealthy compared to the majority of people in the country.

 

[eliza61]

I would be interested in knowing how much these 'genuinely wealthy' own outright as well as manage to actually long term 'save' of their income vs. those who they would judge on the basis of their choice of a luxury purchase.

it's all well and fine to earn much more but if that person/household is indebted for their home, car loans and other expenses I suspect that the persons I personally know who earn no more than/approximately $100,000 but have managed through responsible long and short term spending decisions to be entirely debt free such that they can save 50% of their gross income annually may be in a far better financial situation than those we so frequently read of for whom a job loss or other financial downturn immediately results in repossessions, financial defaults and bankruptcy.

that's not a true indication either though. Would you consider Donald Trump or the Kardashians wealthy? Believe me, Donald has quite a bit of debt.

Debt free is not an indication of wealth. In fact, I find (in my small circles) only the middle class folks make being debt free their primary goal. Not that, that is some thing bad, it's not at all.

as some one else said 'rich" is when your money, makes money for you. The very wealthy people I know "work" at making their money grow. they could lose their jobs and not a darn thing would happen to them and yes they have mega mortgages. My sister did it after she retired from the NYC police department. she turned her first love of interior design into a "theater landscape" business. She has debt, primarily from NYC real estate and a huge mortgage on her west point ny home but her investments give her a positive net worth.

Like I said, the only folks I know who make being "debt free" their primary goal is those who are in the middle class.

Now don't get me wrong she is very aware of how much debt she has and how it's working for her, no she's not out there buying mercedes and lear jets.

 

[smitch425]

I pay $27 to get my hair cut, but I only get it cut in my hometown in Indiana. I have no clue what it costs in our area. I'm sure it's more. DH makes well over $100,000/yr, but maxing out his retirement input, funding the kids' college funds, tithing, and normal monthly expenses eat up a significant portion of that. We save some per month, but not much. We certainly wouldn't call ourselves wealthy based on money alone. We're middle class in our area, and I am thankful every everyday for everything we do have. A lot of people will never make that $100,000 threshold, but there is a whole lot more to living a "wealthy" life than dollar bills, IMHO.