What income qualifies one as wealthy? (1 Viewer)

[Joe S.]

Eric,

Again the problem is there is NO answer to your question, and by trying to delve into tax law and what the politicians think (???) there is no way to keep clear of the no politics discussion. There is NO line you magically cross from comfortable to wealthy. It is a subjective state of mind, not a goal line your income magically crosses. It is something politicians use to make platitudes that ultimately mean nothing (hence why they use the term so much.) In the same way they like to describe us as "safer" than before, how exactly do you quantify safety? Hence, why they throw the term around so much (and that's not political, every single politician in Washington uses that line.)

Your question is basically the same as me asking quantitatively what does "estatic" mean and how is it different from "happy"? It is just like happy, only more so. Wealthy is just like well off, only more so. After that, it is so subjective to each individual that it's almost meaningless.

I answered your question twice. The highest income bracket in the USA tax code is $250,000+. Or you can define welathy as (assets + income) - (debt + expenses).

What else do you want? There are no more answers to your question unless you can find them yourself...

 

[Michael Reuben]

What part of my instruction about avoiding all such references, whether general or specific, was unclear? This will be the last warning.

If you have any comments regarding the above, send them to me privately, as provided in the HTF Rules.

M.

 

[andrew markworthy]

There are several definitions of wealth used in social sciences research, depending upon the particular situation in question.

For most purposes, the very simple measure of annual gross income from all sources will suffice. A more satisfactory measure, however, is a combined measure of income plus liquid assets (i.e. money in savings you could access in a matter of a few hours). Since relatively few people who owe a large amount of money will have many liquid assets, this cuts out people on high incomes but with massive mortgages and outstanding loans. Other measures look at comparative rankings (e.g. the percentage of the population with an income larger than you), income after paying debts and household bills, etc, etc.

Probably the best guide for everyday purposes is the amount of money you have to spend on things above and beyond what are considered basic utilities in your culture. So in most industrialised countries, a basic lifestyle would include a house in reasonable condition just large enough for purpose in a respectable but not necessarily affluent neighbourhood; a car in reasonable repair; possession of sufficient insurance cover, etc, etc. Poverty is a lack of sufficient income to reach these; low income is making barely enough to reach these; moderate income is earning enough to reach these targets and afford luxuries and/or better examples of each utility (e.g. a house larger than is strictly necessary for purpose, in a better location, etc). High income is being able to afford a significant proportion of high-end examples of utilities (e.g. top of the range car, expensive house costing well beyond what's needed for practical purposes, etc). Wealth is where all utilities can be owned in their most prestigious forms and there is an adequate residual income to afford luxuries (e.g. an expensive hobby, longer and better quality vacations, etc) without significantly impinging on savings.

 

[Mort Corey]

Hmmm....expensive hobby? Home Theater? GREAT!!!!! I'm wealthy!!!

Mort (who now has to find where he hid the rest of his new found wealth)

 

[andrew markworthy]

Dream on.

 

[MarkHastings]

Yeah, I was gonna say: Owning $100,000 worth of HT equipment and even $100,000 worth of DVD's, is not the same as owning $200,000 worth of gold (or other riches).

 

[JonZ]

"What income qualifies one as wealthy?"

How about getting a 45 day sentence reduced to a 23 day sentence, serving 3 days and being set free because your cold and dont like the food they serve.

Now thats wealthy.

 

[Malcolm R]

Isn't that ridiculous? Hey, Criminals! Want to get out of jail early? Just don't eat the food! Whatever happened to feeding intravenously?

And, to address the topic, I think anyone with a 6-figure income or more is wealthy.

 

[LewB]

Haven't there been hunger strikes by prisoners before ? I don't recall any one else being let out because of not eating. Besides, from the looks of her, I don't think not eating is a new experience.
As for wealthy, I'd say if you can afford a car collection like Jay Leno, you are wealthy; if you own horses that wind up in the Kentucky Derby, you're wealthy; if people call you Mr. FirstLetterOfYourLastName you are probably wealthy.

 

[andrew markworthy]

Are you sure we've got the right angle on this? Maybe removing her from prison early was a humanitarian gesture to the other inmates.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Then again, maybe not. (Check the latest headlines.)

M.

 

[MarkHastings]

Regardless of whether she went back or not, she still got out. That's still pretty damn wealthy!

 

[Michael Reuben]

In this case, I suspect celebrity is the more potent factor.

M.

 

[MarkHastings]

yeah, but the two kind of go hand in hand. Her celebrity status is only based on the fact that she's super wealthy.

 

[Michael Reuben]

I've paid very little attention to Paris Hilton at any time since she's been in the public eye, but being rich isn't enough to make you a celebrity. (There's an amusing bit of dialogue about this in Reversal of Fortune, when Jeremy Irons, as Claus von Bulow, explains to his attorney how his status was elevated when he became notorious.) The most common route to achieving fame is to display some talent as an entertainer, and I gather she has none. As I understand it, much of her fame derives from being on a reality show that played off of her image as a rich girl and from the release of a sex tape that appeared suspiciously close to the show's debut.

M.

 

[MarkHastings]

Her celeb status definitely came about because of the fact that she is who she is (i.e. the Hilton heiress)...do you think her reality show (or sex tape) would have been so popular if she wasn't wealthy?? I highly doubt it.

That was my point...sure, she had to do something more than just being wealthy (i.e. the sex tape/the reality show), but none of those would have been possible if she wasn't already wealthy. Her celeb status is solely based on her money. Without it, she wouldn't come close to being a celeb.Yeah, but again, they only became popular because of who she is (i.e. her wealth).

 

[Michael Reuben]

That's my only point: celebrity and wealth are not the same thing. And knowing a little something about the criminal justice system, I suspect celebrity was more a factor than wealth in her early release.

Celebrity was definitely the key factor in her return to prison, because the early release provoked an outcry over special treatment for celebrities. (See the story in the NYT of 6/10/07 for a detailed account.)

M.

 

[Edwin-S]

She may be wealthy and a celebrity, but she's still just disgusting.

 

[Eric_L]

I only wish she was in her own tax bracket. Sadly many households with only a fraction of her wealth pay tax at the same rate.

 

[Nathan_F]

Yes, but 35% of 1,000,000 is still 350,000, where as 35% of 500,000 is only 175,000... the people with the higher incomes still pay more in taxes.