My bare minimum standard for calling a person “rich” is whether they can live in luxury purely on the passive income from their investments. By that standard, a person with only a million dollars would not be rich. You probably need more like 10 million.
I agree one million isn’t abject poverty, but it would be a giant change in lifestyle. They’d either have to give up on most luxuries and live somewhere cheap, or they’d have to actually work for money.
I’m not sure you’re trying to say that I did, but I didn’t mean that 10 million was the minimum needed to say a person is rich.
I was saying my standard for rich was in the neighborhood of 10 million, compared to 1 million. If you have 1 million, your 6% would be 60k, but you don’t get interest on your house where you’re living, so if you purchased a house in today’s market that might be 250k, and now you’re down to 45k. Certainly not a salary where you can live in luxury.
Like, sorta, but also no. “Most luxuries” and “live somewhere cheap” are both insane things to say, too.
I know what you’re trying to get at, and I get it, but to say that someone who can still drive any car they want, live pretty much wherever except for some very specific places, get into whatever niche hobby their heart desires, and never needs to fear unemployment is not rich is just silly. I also said “tax them”, which means they’d still have everything else they currently own and could make money on that stuff, too.
A person with a million dollars is a person without any meaningful restriction on their life.
Edit: Goddamn, a lot of ya’ll really upset about this comment. Too bad, learn to read, and, failing that, find a high bridge over deep water ‘cause dealing with ya’ll just ain’t worth it.
You said “tax them into only having a million dollars,” which I cannot reconcile with your latest statement “they’d still have everything else they currently own and could make money on that stuff, too.”
If you are talking purely about how much cash they have in the bank, then every person would just buy stocks until they had under that amount. Almost nothing would change.
FWIW, stocks also need to be taxed a lot more than they are, or sharply limited in their trading potential and/or as compensation. Compensation in stock is how most of the billionaires of today amass their wealth, and it needs to stop being the loophole that it is.
Well, if I had a million right now and stopped working, and everyone in my family would not work either anymore, that million will not last us even until my retirement age, that’s also if the inflation is 0% until then. A million 50 years ago would probably be enough for that, but not now
Isn’t a million like the price of a house these days? I get that we’re all poor and we’re never gonna own property, but the price of a house isn’t enough to live in luxury for life.
To be fair, a million dollars in some parts of the US gets you a decent size house and one car. You still need to work every day. You can still be bankrupt by medical debt.
Contrast that with actual rich folks who can burn a million dollars in a bon fire every morning and still have more money at the end of the year than they started with.
Point is: The former are more comfortable than many. The latter are a literal cancer on society that must be addressed.
I know man but with a million bucks you can choose to move somewhere cheap to live. The rest of us can’t do that because there aren’t good jobs in the cheap areas. There’s plenty of beautiful homes for $200k in my state but there all in the middle of nowhere 3 hour drive from the closest city that has a hospital.
I mean yeah it’s cheap so you can retire there lol, but those people are a problem because they’re still trying to become billionaires and also they’re the soldiers of the billionaires. For $100k a year theyre the ones denying good insurance claims and areesting peaceful protestors, Bezos and Musk themselves don’t hurt society with their own bodies, they pay upper middle class folk to do that for them. Then they retire with a mil or two in the bank and try to blame the people they agreed to work for their whole lives.
The top 1% are cancer on society. Quite literally. They consume resources and expand to the point where it kills the host.
People in the top 20%, excluding the 1%, aren’t like that. They’re surely more comfortable. They surely have better opportunity. But their existence doesn’t threaten the rest of us.
The comment you replied to states “The rich will claim you’re driving them to abject poverty if you tax them into only having a million dollars.”
You say people with $1.000.000 still have to work, they are not “actual rich folk”. But that’s not relevant to the comment you reply to, since them “having to work all day” and them still being able to be “bankrupt by medical debt” still doesn’t equal the abject poverty the rich claim they’ll be driven to. In other words, it doesn’t matter that people with one million are not in the same position as the people with ten million, because neither would be living in abject poverty; ergo my comment.
The rich will claim you’re driving them to abject poverty if you tax them into only having a million dollars.
My bare minimum standard for calling a person “rich” is whether they can live in luxury purely on the passive income from their investments. By that standard, a person with only a million dollars would not be rich. You probably need more like 10 million.
I agree one million isn’t abject poverty, but it would be a giant change in lifestyle. They’d either have to give up on most luxuries and live somewhere cheap, or they’d have to actually work for money.
6% interest in 10million is 600k plenty to live on unless you have multiple houses, personal cruise ships or private jets.
A safe withdrawal rate on funds invested is usually 3-4%, not 6%.
Not that $300k isn’t more than sufficient for a high quality lifestyle. Your point is more than valid.
I’m not sure you’re trying to say that I did, but I didn’t mean that 10 million was the minimum needed to say a person is rich.
I was saying my standard for rich was in the neighborhood of 10 million, compared to 1 million. If you have 1 million, your 6% would be 60k, but you don’t get interest on your house where you’re living, so if you purchased a house in today’s market that might be 250k, and now you’re down to 45k. Certainly not a salary where you can live in luxury.
A house for 250k? Lucky!!
About $2million is enough for a trust fund one can live relatively comfortably on. $10million and you can live in excess indefinitely.
Where are you getting 6%?
Historical average of the stock market, who the fucking knows now. I get shit because I’m not saving at the moment.
Like, sorta, but also no. “Most luxuries” and “live somewhere cheap” are both insane things to say, too.
I know what you’re trying to get at, and I get it, but to say that someone who can still drive any car they want, live pretty much wherever except for some very specific places, get into whatever niche hobby their heart desires, and never needs to fear unemployment is not rich is just silly. I also said “tax them”, which means they’d still have everything else they currently own and could make money on that stuff, too.
A person with a million dollars is a person without any meaningful restriction on their life.
Edit: Goddamn, a lot of ya’ll really upset about this comment. Too bad, learn to read, and, failing that, find a high bridge over deep water ‘cause dealing with ya’ll just ain’t worth it.
You said “tax them into only having a million dollars,” which I cannot reconcile with your latest statement “they’d still have everything else they currently own and could make money on that stuff, too.”
If you are talking purely about how much cash they have in the bank, then every person would just buy stocks until they had under that amount. Almost nothing would change.
FWIW, stocks also need to be taxed a lot more than they are, or sharply limited in their trading potential and/or as compensation. Compensation in stock is how most of the billionaires of today amass their wealth, and it needs to stop being the loophole that it is.
Well, if I had a million right now and stopped working, and everyone in my family would not work either anymore, that million will not last us even until my retirement age, that’s also if the inflation is 0% until then. A million 50 years ago would probably be enough for that, but not now
Isn’t a million like the price of a house these days? I get that we’re all poor and we’re never gonna own property, but the price of a house isn’t enough to live in luxury for life.
To be fair, a million dollars in some parts of the US gets you a decent size house and one car. You still need to work every day. You can still be bankrupt by medical debt.
Contrast that with actual rich folks who can burn a million dollars in a bon fire every morning and still have more money at the end of the year than they started with.
Point is: The former are more comfortable than many. The latter are a literal cancer on society that must be addressed.
I guess it depends what people consider the “millionaire lifestyle”, which must go up with inflation like everything else.
I know man but with a million bucks you can choose to move somewhere cheap to live. The rest of us can’t do that because there aren’t good jobs in the cheap areas. There’s plenty of beautiful homes for $200k in my state but there all in the middle of nowhere 3 hour drive from the closest city that has a hospital.
Okay, let’s say I move somewhere cheap. Now I have a million bucks.
I can’t retire. Still got to work. Still need health insurance. Still at the whims of the fate of the universe.
Is it more comfortable? Sure! I’d love that. But these people aren’t the problem. The yacht with the garage for a smaller yacht in it is the problem.
I mean yeah it’s cheap so you can retire there lol, but those people are a problem because they’re still trying to become billionaires and also they’re the soldiers of the billionaires. For $100k a year theyre the ones denying good insurance claims and areesting peaceful protestors, Bezos and Musk themselves don’t hurt society with their own bodies, they pay upper middle class folk to do that for them. Then they retire with a mil or two in the bank and try to blame the people they agreed to work for their whole lives.
a decent size house and a car ≠ abject poverty
You realize that there are options in-between those, right?
Yes i do and i totally agree with your point, just pointing at a flaw in your reasoning
Oh, I’m still not seeing it. Sorry.
The top 1% are cancer on society. Quite literally. They consume resources and expand to the point where it kills the host.
People in the top 20%, excluding the 1%, aren’t like that. They’re surely more comfortable. They surely have better opportunity. But their existence doesn’t threaten the rest of us.
The comment you replied to states “The rich will claim you’re driving them to abject poverty if you tax them into only having a million dollars.”
You say people with $1.000.000 still have to work, they are not “actual rich folk”. But that’s not relevant to the comment you reply to, since them “having to work all day” and them still being able to be “bankrupt by medical debt” still doesn’t equal the abject poverty the rich claim they’ll be driven to. In other words, it doesn’t matter that people with one million are not in the same position as the people with ten million, because neither would be living in abject poverty; ergo my comment.
That classifies people with 2 million as rich. I’m saying that even with 5 million you need to keep working.
I’m saying whether you need to keep working or not is not relevant, since it in neither case does owning that amount equal to abject poverty.
There are no good billionaires