New thread as didn't want to derail the C2W one
I appreciate it's all relative, ie someone getting paid 60k is probably 'richer' than someone on minimum wage. But it's not as simple as that, the person on minimum wage could not have to pay rent or mortgage, no dependents etc, living in fife, whilst the guy being paid 60k may live in London with a massive mortgage, and a wife who looks after 4 kids full time.
I personally am in the 40% tax bracket, but I certainly don't feel rich, ie coukdnt afford a holiday this year, minimum savings etc. I live comfortably enough, I don't need to worry about paying bills or food, so I'm not poor either. But I don't have piles of spare cash to spend on frivolous stuff (ironically I use to, despite earning less as my circumstances were different)
Got me thinking what folks woukd consider the measure of being 'rich'? Certain amount of disposable income? Huge amount of cash in the bank? Being comfortable enough to retire at 60 with a decent standard of living?
There are no right or wrong answers...
Don't see you getting an answer to that question. Easier to define wealthy, i.e. gets an income but doesn't have to work.
Rich is all about perspective, many people would see me as rich but I would see others as the rich so does that mean I am rich or not?
Rich is all about perspective,
Indeed, hence why there are no right or wrong answers. Anyone on minimum wage in the uk woukd be considered rich to a starving bloke in a 3rd world country
I'm just interested in individual opinions and perspectives, there is obviously no definitive cut off point that makes you rich..
Anyone who earns more than me 😀
As I approach 50 after having spent a smidge under half my life in the Army, I find myself quite content that I have all my limbs, faculties, and no major or long term health issues, and the spicy nostalgia is managed effectively and has minimal impact on my life.
Which is not the same for some of my friends and colleagues.
In terms of external factors I have a modest home and standard modest material things, a stable job, a stable relationship, and a good circle of friends, and the freedom to enjoy my weekends and evenings in a way that enhances my life.
I consider myself rich (and lucky).
Rich = independent of the need to work to maintain lifestyle
Well off = need to work but <75% of earned income spent on fixed costs, > 2*income held as assets
Higher Average = >75% spent on fixed costs, > 2* income held as Asset
Lower average = >75% spent on fixed costs, < 2* income held as Assets
Poor = >95% of income spent on fixed costs
All definitions made up on the spot
at its simplest
Income - Outgoings = >£1 = Rich
Income - Outgoings = <£1 = Poor
You've won at life if you're content with what you've got, get to do a lot of things that make you happy and live within your means. I'm lucky enough to know quite a few people in that category, but they have vastly different levels of wealth.
I don't have to worry about money to live the life I want to, but I could buy or lease a brand new Range Rover, fly first class, and stay in 5 star hotels etc and make myself poor pretty quickly.
Rich = independent of the need to work to maintain lifestyle
Or do something you enjoy and get paid for it? If you're lucky enough to do something you enjoy work can be rewarding (even if sometimes you'd rather be doing something else)
yeah it's a tricky one. I always just put it down to salary. But then, if you start a job on £80k, when are you 'rich'? Day 1? Day 2? Clearly not. 5 years? 10 years? If you're under about 35 you'll have a student loan and possibly a PG loan, and be facing an effective 57% marginal tax rate for most of your career.
There's also grades of 'rich' and then 'rich'. New BMW rich, second home rich, yacht rich. Where does it start?
I suppose my personal definition starts somewhere between the new BMW and the 2nd home.
Then again, because I was skint for most of my adult life, the fact that I can now buy the organic eggs instead of the crap ones, or get £20 out of the bank without a second thought, makes me feel rich. I'm happy with that.
Or do something you enjoy and get paid for it?
You're still exchanging labour for cash, because you dont have enough to capital not to, even if you are one of those perverted sickos that like it
the apocryphal John Lennon quote
"When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down 'happy'. They told me I didn't understand the assignment, and I told them they didn't understand life."
If you can afford to put more into pension contributions and investments than the average take home pay, that would be pretty rich IMO (it could be argued that more than the legal minimum wage would also be a reasonable classification).
It is hard to really define currently, with asset inflation what might have been considered a decent wage 20 years ago could see you struggling to get on the property ladder now and give you less to invest in a pension, so the is a generational drag away from being in "financial comfort".
I have been earning a chunk below average wages for most of my working life, but in my mid 50's I have now jumped up the pay scale a bit (still not in the higher tax bracket) unfortunately for me with the asset inflation and the current market bubbles I am in a similar position now as many in younger generations with less time to have hope for change. Still now in a better position than I have been for much of my life, so I can't by any means classify myself as poor.
One thing I have sometimes wondered is how many people would not be able to buy the houses they own, if they had to buy them now at current market prices.
I appreciate it's all relative, ie someone getting paid 60k is probably 'richer' than someone on minimum wage.
Earnings aren't the best gauge of how rich you are. Some people are rich enough not to need a high wage, or indeed any wage, to have a very nice life indeed. Others need a high wage just to be able to afford live where their career has taken them.
Having said that, £60k puts you in the top 10% of UK earners, so better paid than 90% of workers, never mind people on minimum wage.
Rich is the freedom to make the buying choices you want without having to worry about the consequences.
My wealthy friends class you as rich if you own a property on Mustique. If you rent , then you are not rich.
They live in a 3 million pound house.
A double chocolate brownie with double cream
I think a factor is how often you think about spending money.
Some people money, or lack of, is an almost constant in their lives. They have to budget for everything, they have to be aware of every penny they spend.
Then there are those that they won't think about buying a coffee or a beer, but a new laptop or TV needs quite of bit of thought.
From there it's a sliding scale through not thinking about buying a car or a holiday, to a house, to never really thinking about expenditure at all. And certainly never once thinking "can I afford that?"
That isn't always related to income either. The person earning £30k a year with no mortgage and no dependents will be higher up the scale than the person on £100k with a huge mortgage, 2 teenage kids and a divorce bill.
So to answer the OP, rich is when you only start to look at your bank balance for "big" purchases and the cost of things rarely enters your mind day to day.
Back when I was in the UK I had a good job that paid me a good salary but, due to my desire to stay in the same house after my divorce, my re-mortgage to single payer meant that I didn't really consider myself as having much spare cash or being rich. Most of the things I bnought were second hand (see my Stumpy as a good example).
When I sold up and moved to Sweden I downsized quite aggressively and managed to buy this place for cash with the excess I had from the sale of my old place in the UK. It's outside Stockholm, I don't need to commute into the city any more and a lot of my bills are cheaper now that I am out in the country.
With that in mind, I consider myself "comfortable", possibly even "well off" given the job I have and the limited outgoings. I still don't really splash out on new things (but I did buy a sandwich toaster last month - it was discounted) and, compared to some in Stockholm, I'm nearly on the breadline; they earn a shit-tonne, but have mortgages to match. Still, I am actually happy with how my finances are. Sure, I'll spend more on electricity over winter than I really want to, but I'm not planning on going away to Thailand for three weeks over Christmas like some people I know.
So yeah, "Comfortable" probably fits best.
Got me thinking what folks woukd consider the measure of being 'rich'?
Rich = Having everything you need and most of what you want.
someone getting paid 60k is probably 'richer' than someone on minimum wage.
No probably about it.. Min wage is poor, you're being underpaid and given in-work benefits so that businesses can be subsidised to pay out less. It's a scam that keeps people struggling to get by so a small number of people can soak up more than they ever need.
My brother in law is someone I consider 'rich' he does not consider himself rich as he has friends who own houses in the Hamptons. He bought some art a while ago and said "if spending £5k on this is a problem then we have bigger things to worry about". He does have a massive mortgage though, but only because of an insane extension and he invests rather than paying down the loan. He could also sell his Islington flat and clear the house and remaining mortgage on that I'm sure.
I also have a friend who works 3 days a week but lives in a house worth 7 figures (the first of which isn't a 1). He probably doesn't look at himself as rich and isn't lavish in his lifestyle, but he's way better off than I am.
I define someone as "Rich" if they don't need to work and can maintain a life where money isn't a concern. If they need to work to live but can live lavishly, then that to me is "Wealthy".
If you need to work to survive then you're working class IMO. I don't see anyone with a household income of less than 160k P.A as rich, well off, maybe.
I'd just class it as having everything you need without having to worry about money, which could mean different things to different people.
You choose your mortgage and where you live. If you take out a large mortgage that does not make you poor, it’s your choice.
Poor is minimum wage high rents and struggling to pay the bills.
In my experience, rich is having enough money to buy a horse for your daughter but not having bought one. 😭
Rich is getting to the end of them month there is still money in the account
I'll never be rich if I don't stop buying bikes and bike gear.
Got me thinking what folks woukd consider the measure of being 'rich'? Certain amount of disposable income? Huge amount of cash in the bank? Being comfortable enough to retire at 60 with a decent standard of living?
Are we talking in the context of "tax the rich" here...? Or more that what does someone else who might be struggling financially see as rich...?
If the former, then it's very definitely an "accumulation of assets" I would say... Enough of them so that their passive (unearnt) income means that they don't actually have to work at all, and they still accrue more wealth... Where that figure lies, I'm not 100% sure, but there's a lot of people such as Gary Stevenson and other respected economists and financial modellers putting the figure at around £10m of assets these days...
Rich in the context of your average person who's living pay cheque to pay cheque is an entirely different proposal though... In this context, many would see "rich" simply as someone who has the financial freedom to be able to be able to pay their bills and do the things that they want to do (within reason) and to know that they can afford it comfortably...
The problem, politically speaking, is that the two are continually being conflated by those with vested interests in keeping their wealthy assets and making sure that the poor remain poor...
Rich = independent of the need to work to maintain lifestyle
I would add that you have enough assets that your children and grandchildren don't need to work.
the person on minimum wage could not have to pay rent or mortgage, no dependents etc, living in fife,
Wow, I must be in the Ultra rich category as well above minimum wage AND living Fife.
Being comfortable enough to retire at 60 with a decent standard of living?
Being rich is an order of magnitude above being comfortable. Rich people basically don't work but they have enough assets that they live a life of luxury and still get richer.
living in fife
Oi, I'm telling teacher on you!!!!
Although good ****ing luck on minimum wage trying to live in St Andrews whilst still being well off
Rich = independent of the need to work to maintain lifestyle
How I see being rich is having a big fancy house/car/toys .. and being able to knock work on the head and not having a worry about the possibility of upgrading any of the big fancy house/car/toys the following month.
Lots live from one months wage to the next - some do this whilst only having enough money to catch a bus to work, whilst others do so whilst driving their £80k SUV to work ... rich for me is when work is a choice and not a necessity to maintain your lifestyle.
I'd imagine having to Google Mustique and The Hamptons is probably a good indicator. Turns out it's not the band that shouty one was in. *Shrugs*
Rich really means to me, that someone is very wealthy and has a lavish luxury lifestyle.
However, in some regards, rich has become less about a lavish luxury lifestyle and more perhaps a (upper-?)middle-class lifestyle, due to how distant that lifestyle is from my own. Rich in this sense is having enough finances to have good freedom of movement, to not be tied to a place because you can't afford to travel elsewhere, to have enough time and money to do the things you enjoy, going on holiday more than twice a year. To be financially secure. To have confidence you can move home to another location and find the means to continue (or improve) your lifestyle.
I was on £24k for a few years (35hrs pw), for the first couple of years it was the most financially secure I'd ever been. Next year it'll be closer to minimum wage. £30k would make a world of difference.
Currently unemployed. Mortgage + 2x kids.
If you have to rely on earned income then you aren't rich.
I appreciate it's all relative, ie someone getting paid 60k is probably 'richer' than someone on minimum wage. But it's not as simple as that, the person on minimum wage could not have to pay rent or mortgage, no dependents etc, living in fife, whilst the guy being paid 60k may live in London with a massive mortgage, and a wife who looks after 4 kids full time
All true but to use your examples I would suggest the person earning the 60k is considerably richer than the one on minimum wage. Just because they choose to spend it on different lifestyles doesn’t make any difference.
The difference is what they have chosen to spend the income on. Having kids and how many is a lifestyle choice for most. Living in London with a massive mortgage again a lifestyle choice. I’m not arguing there is anything wrong with those choices, indeed they are very popular ones . But that doesn’t stop them being choices as to how to spend income.
You choose your mortgage and where you live. If you take out a large mortgage that does not make you poor, it’s your choice.
Poor is minimum wage high rents and struggling to pay the bills.
Disagree with that tbh. Lots of folks can't just choose to upsticks from their roots, and you don't need to be on minimum wage to not be able to afford to live in many places. Try living anywhere in London and bringing up a kid on 40k a year and tell me what standard of living you have.
I must be in the Ultra rich category as well above minimum wage AND living Fife.
Fear not..i live in fife as well! Apparently it's one of the cheapest places in Britain to live! (Other than St Andrews...but that barely counts as part of Fife!)
All true but to use your examples I would suggest the person earning the 60k is considerably richer than the one on minimum wage. Just because they choose to spend it on different lifestyles doesn’t make any difference.
The difference is what they have chosen to spend the income on. Having kids and how many is a lifestyle choice for most. Living in London with a massive mortgage again a lifestyle choice. I’m not arguing there is anything wrong with those choices, indeed they are very popular ones . But that doesn’t stop them being choices as to how to spend income.
I really dont think living in London with a massive mortgage is a lifestyle choice for many who have to do it
I get the point you are making but I don't particularly agree with it. Ie If a guy on 70k can't afford to pay his bills or feed his family, he's poor, regardless of the circumstances or life choices that got him into that situation
Having matured (a bit) I've realised that no amount of 'stuff' or numbers on an ATM screen can make up for unhappiness, and for me, being comfortable and content makes me happy and feel 'rich'. Working myself to death or running up huge stressful amounts of debt to have the things I'm told (and with the horrors of the back-end SM algorithm at play) brainwashed into thinking will make me happy does the exact opposite.
If I can do the things I love to do (going to the Pub with friends, hanging out with family, modest travel, riding bikes etc) and I've got enough left to fill the cupboard and keep the lights on, I'm Rich.
Oh as for monetary 'Rich', anyone who benefits from generational wealth. Never joined the rat-race, never will, off-spring never will. Tax, money worries, work, bills that's all other people problems.
Having a bottle of wine in the house for more than 24 hours
Having matured (a bit) I've realised that no amount of 'stuff' or numbers on an ATM screen can make up for unhappiness,
Probably true, but I'd like to be in a position to find out for myself.
I was quite worried by the initial comments discussing salary etc, it appeared the establishment has indeed done an excellent job of pulling the wool over so many people's eyes.
Thankfully many of the later posters get it. Being properly rich is very rarely about income, it's about wealth.
If a guy on 70k can't afford to pay his bills or feed his family, he's poor, regardless of the circumstances or life choices that got him into that situation
Absolute bollocks. Anyone on 70k who can't afford the bills and kids is a ****ing idiot who doesn't deserve to be paid that much.
Its partly money, partly attitude (and circumstance)
I don't have to check my bank balance before I buy something, even on the last week of the month.
For big purchases like bikes and cars, its a case of "carefully considering what amount do I think is a sensible and practical amount to spend on this item", and then I buy it.
However its obvious that my wants, my hobbies, and my general lifestyle has been moulded to fit the available funds.
Double my salary and there would be a number of obvious differences.
Give me a divorce and child support and interest rate rise and suddenly I'd be counting my pennies.
-----
Really though, all of us here, we all have (mostly) our health, we have time and money to play on our adult toys, and we've time to post on an internet forum on a friday afternoon. Thats pretty rich.
Maybe I was a bit harsh on my last comment. The point is, the person on 70k who's financially struggling can scale back. Someone on minimum wage is likely to be unable to scale back.
Absolute bollocks. Anyone on 70k who can't afford the bills and kids is a ****ing idiot who doesn't deserve to be paid that much
Not really
It's quite conceivable you could be struggling on 70k a year If you have to spend 2.5k on a mortgage every month, and feed a family of 6 with you being the only earner in the house.
Alternatively they could be an absolute idiot who's blown all his cash on coke and hookers and owes the local dealer thousands
Either way, they have no money = poor ( imo)
Speaking from personal exp, I feel poorer now than I did 15 years ago, despite earning about twice as much
If a guy on 70k can't afford to pay his bills or feed his family, he's poor, regardless of the circumstances or life choices that got him into that situation
Absolute bollocks. Anyone on 70k who can't afford the bills and kids is a ****ing idiot who doesn't deserve to be paid that much.
You haven't seen the costs of living in central London any time recently have you...
The likelihood is that on £70k a year in central London, they aren't likely to be able to afford any kind of mortgage (at least not for where they need to be for work) and so are renting, probably £2k+ per month down the drain even (more if they have a family to house!)... Even ignoring the fact that £20k of that £70k he is paying 40% tax on, where you spend your time can have a HUGE bearing on how much you need to earn to maintain a lifestyle of any kind... I live in a 4 bedroom detached house with a big double garage, double width driveway with enough room for 6 cars (yes really! It's handy for when the outlaws come to stay in their massive motorhome) and it was purchased last year for the sum of £445k... Can you even imagine how little £445k would get you if you had to live and work in central London? Can you imagine what a 4 bed house with a double garage (not gonna happen!) and big driveway would cost in central London...?
Yet take that same £445k and start looking in rural Scotland and I could have bought acres of land along with a bigger house than the one I live in now, breathtaking scenery and MTB riding from my door...
Everything is about perspective.
I've got more than one bike, and a canoe. I'm loaded... 😎
I'm rich enough that I am even really sure how much I earn, although as a bog standard teacher it's not much compared to many. I am not rich enough to think £7k on a road bike is a good idea unlike many I ride with. In summary..not sure.
Rich to me is having no debts of any significance and putting more than ten percent of ones income into savings each month.
Then using those savings for all purchases including vehicles.
You haven't seen the costs of living in central London any time recently have you
Absolutely ..70k a year leaves you about 4200 a month after tax, whxih on the face of it isn't an insignificant amount. But you are paying into your pension, so it's closer to 4k.
Straight away the average first time buyer in london woukd lose about 2.5k on their mortgage. Then you have council tax, Utilities, transport costs , house insurance..
All of a sudden you have less than a grand a month to pay for everything else for you, your wife and your kids.
Compare that to a guy on minimum wage living in his mums spare room...his take home is about 1700 quid a month...
Just don't live in Central London? would you want to spend eternity living with your mother?
You haven't seen the costs of living in central London any time recently have you...
Nope but just taken a look. Websites confirm £75k+ for family of 4 in Central London. Really though, central London is an exception rather than the rule. What prevents someone moving out of central London to a more affordable area and commuting? A family of six could live in outer London for half that (www.minimumincome.org.uk). £70k gives you choices. Minimum wage less so.
Rich = independent of the need to work to maintain lifestyle
Including retired folk?
I think most people considered to be rich are "merely" wealthy. I think a measure of where you are on the wealth, rich, uber rich spectrum should include assets as well as income.
While we're on it... because it's not obvious to me; and dictionary definitions at the top of search results don't allow for distinction; what is the difference between wealthy and rich?
In this day and age I would say anybody who is genuinely happy with what they have is far richer than someone with money constantly trying to keep up with the Jones's.
Just don't live in Central London? would you want to spend eternity living with your mother?
Exactly. The whole premise assumes you have to live in London or central London and you don’t. It’s a choice like most things in life that control how much disposable income you have at the end of the month.
In reality it is those who have wealth that generates sufficient income not to need to work who are the properly rich
Just don't live in Central London? would you want to spend eternity living with your mother?
My point was that you can still be 'poor' on 70k, or relatively 'rich', at least in terms of disposal cash, on minimum wage..it entirely depends on your circumstances
Either way, I don't think it's fair to say that someone on 70k who is struggling to pay the bills is by default an idiot, as was previously suggested
My point was that you can still be 'poor' on 70k, or relatively 'rich', at least in terms of disposal cash, on minimum wage..it entirely depends on your circumstances
Indeed - linking back to my earlier post, a homeowner on 70k who bought their house in 2001 for £100k is going to be far far richer than one who bought theirs last year for £400k.
Rich to me means you own a house outright, have a big pension pot, and still have enough spare income to live day to day without relying on loans or credit, and not dipping into savings to buy a new car or new washing machine etc.
A net worth over 2 million I guess would work in the north.
In London, you're probably looking at more like 5 million more depending on how extravagant you are.
Are you happy with a Honda jazz or does it need to be a Mercedes?
My point was that you can still be 'poor' on 70k, or relatively 'rich', at least in terms of disposal cash, on minimum wage..it entirely depends on your circumstances
Corner cases. For the majority of minimum wage workers, to go to £70k would be life changing. If you can't see that you need to open your eyes.
A net worth over 2 million I guess would work in the north.
In London, you're probably looking at more like 5 million more depending on how extravagant you are.
Not at all. People seem to have this strange view of what London looks like and the demographics, it’s a massive, diverse place and people with a net worth of over 2 million are rich.
London .... it’s a massive, diverse place and people with a net worth of over 2 million are rich.
I don't think so, when I say net worth I'm inculding having a house that you actually own, with no mortgage debt, plus savings and investments and pensions.... how any londerners do you know that are debt free?
I think that's the key phrase: "debt free".
Aside from taking on 'tactical debt' to play interest rates, if you're in debt you can't describe youself as 'rich'.
how any londerners do you know that are debt free?
A fair few actually.
I personally am in the 40% tax bracket, but I certainly don't feel rich, ie coukdnt afford a holiday this year, minimum savings etc. I live comfortably enough, I don't need to worry about paying bills or food, so I'm not poor either. But I don't have piles of spare cash to spend on frivolous stuff (ironically I use to, despite earning less as my circumstances were different)
Not a dig specifically at you OP as I don't know your circumstances.....
I meet people who complain scratch that - too strong a word....make the case for their comparative poverty despite a healthy income, but when you dig a little deeper it's often down to choices they have made that they didn't have to. Can't afford a holiday....because of the **** off massive mortgage they've got on a **** off massive house. Can't afford a holiday...because they felt it necessary to drop £38K on a kitchen. Or...this is mildly controversial....they earn a six figure salary and can't afford more than a bedsit because they decided to boff a work colleague and lost most of their wealth in a divorce and child support. What they really mean is they have plenty of cash but it's tied up in decisions to spend more than necessary they have already made and (unusually for them) have run out of ability to make more. What they've forgotten (or never experienced) is not being able to contemplaint making any of those decisions and money is just about having just enough to get by and their pleas for sympathy are a bit cringy.
Maybe one measurement of wealth could be the ability to make really shit decisions that would sink someone less well healed and still keep your head above water.
My point was that you can still be 'poor' on 70k
I reckon an awful lot of people, including myself, would like to give it a try. You know.,., just to see
In this day and age I would say anybody who is genuinely happy with what they have is far richer than someone with money constantly trying to keep up with the Jones's
Very much this.
My sister lives in central London, has a house worth far more than our entire street, has a household income the same as the GDP of Portugal but the hours she works and the stress levels she’s constantly under… **** that!
I'd be laughing all the way to the bank if I earned £70k per year... this isn't a debt problem, this is keeping up with the Jonses, living the life of someone who earns 4x that, or at least trying to, and wrecking yourself and your future in the process.
I'd be laughing all the way to the bank if I earned £70k per year... this isn't a debt problem, this is keeping up with the Jonses
Not really. It depends where you live, if you are single and if you have a student debt. If in London or easy commuting then that 70k is rather less impressive than if you live in blackpool and your partner is also working.
Its why there are the acronym HENRY and the term generation rent.
House prices are completely out of kilter with the economy and every government since Thatcher will protect the owners above all else regardless of how moronic decisions they have made.
My point is, if you need to take a loan or credit, you are not rich, you are paying the rich.
That's a different proposition to taking out a credit card for a 1% cashback or whatever.
That will never make you rich, it just makes it hurt less when you realise how shafted you are.
I can kind of see where the £70k thing is coming from, I earn a lot less but with wife we are around that figure. We have a small 3 bed terrace and drive a Dacia but we don't really have any other debts than a mortgage which is now quite small. We don't go on expensive holidays but If I wanted a new bike I could buy one tomorrow. Certainly my son doesnt have to worry about asking for new shoes or whatever like I did as a child so I am happy enough. However looking around at others...we are not well off.
It’s all relative
In the past I’ve been proper skint. Back then if I’d know how much income we have as a family I’d want told have said I would be rich. Now I’m m here I’d say I’m comfortable but not rich
I'd be laughing all the way to the bank if I earned £70k per year... this isn't a debt problem, this is keeping up with the Jonses
Nope it’s not I don’t know anyone like that. I think that’s an old fashioned aspiring lower middle class thing from the 80’s/90s in a Mrs Bucket kind of way
There was something on here called the £1 game or similar.
Basicaly the crux of it was up the value by adding a zero ( £10 , £100 , £1000 , £10,000 etc ) then answer who many '1' in timeline it would take to realise that amount or bow out gracefully.
As an example Q =£10. Answer = 1 min
Q= £1000. Answer = 1day .
Q = £100,000. Answer = 1 month.
I think if you get to the 1 million within 1 week then that to me - Rich
In this day and age I would say anybody who is genuinely happy with what they have is far richer than someone with money constantly trying to keep up with the Jones's
I'd say definitely this ^
That's me. Never chased 'stuff', not tried to climb the housing ladder for ever more grand properties, a 3 bed terraced house was fine by us. Our two kids are balanced individuals (IMO) who know the value of hard work and saving to buy something rather than adopting the "have it now, pay later" mentality (Hopefully they'll both bring their children up with similar values) We don't have wardrobes full of designer clothes/jewellery etc. Run one car but could afford two (pointless....one would always be parked doing nothing) So rich for me is not having the worry of paying for next weeks food shop as my parents did 50 years ago, being able to go out for the day and have a meal out rather than take tupperware sandwiches....
You haven't seen the costs of living in central London any time recently have you.
Other locations are available
If your daughter is a horse girl, she's rich and you are skint, lol!