Why you're not wealthy

[Samson]

It depends on how you define wealth. One theory of wealth is that the word is not a measure of money but time. Your wealth is how many months you could go without working and maintain your standard of living, to some.

I wish we could get through one thread without someone throwing out the "It depends on how you define" card.

For christssakes..... define wealth? can I say "Rich" instead?

The major division between those that get rich, and those that don't, is their tolerance for risk.

People get more wealthy when they choose to take a risk.

Of course, there is also the possiblity of getting less wealthy when taking a risk. This is why the vast majority of people are happy taking no risk, and making the best of what they have.

It is why I'm not wealthy.

 

[Bern80]

I think a better question, and one that will help to develop a better understanding of the essential topic, is how many ways are there to acquire wealth?

How many is hard to say. What I do know is that there is more than the one way that most of us are taught (get a job). I confess none of my ideas are original. I just find the subject of wealth fascinating and read a lot about it. Robert Kiyosaki is a good one. He is one who defines wealth by time.

Another good question is at what point is one considered wealthy?

That's a tough one too because I think that's self defined. I'll be wealthy when I can have the standard of living I want without having to work. One book I saw it more specifically defined was in "The Millionaire Next Door". They define a millionaire as anyone with assets totaling a million dollars. Even that isn't as cut and dried as it seems. Assets are things that generate income because they are the opposite of a liability. Therefore the things you have of value are only assets once they're sold. By that standard I bet most of us don't know that many people with stuff they could turn into a million dollars.

 

[william the wie]

There is wealth and then there is wealth. Old money is an entirely different wealth from that of the nouveau riche.

Old money and those who have it are about 100 cuts above the nouveau riche. They are more genteel, caring, giving, and unassuming about their wealth. They don't advertise or flaunt their wealth. It's the nouveau riche that we have more exposure to - the snotty, "upwardly mobile," "he who has the most toys wins" types. They put on a good show, but there's not an ounce of humility or sincerity in anything they do and they would stop at nothing to one-up, cheat, screw, or lie about in order to be "better than thou." I know - worked with some of them for a long time and all you want to do is just slap the living shit out them because of their unbridled arrogance.

I've also had a good deal of exposure to the "old money" people. There is a huge difference in attitudes and goals.

The correct term is wannabe not nouveau riche.

 

[william the wie]

It depends on how you define wealth. One theory of wealth is that the word is not a measure of money but time. Your wealth is how many months you could go without working and maintain your standard of living, to some.

I wish we could get through one thread without someone throwing out the "It depends on how you define" card.

For christssakes..... define wealth? can I say "Rich" instead?

The major division between those that get rich, and those that don't, is their tolerance for risk.

People get more wealthy when they choose to take a risk.

Of course, there is also the possiblity of getting less wealthy when taking a risk. This is why the vast majority of people are happy taking no risk, and making the best of what they have.

It is why I'm not wealthy.

Actually the rich tend to be risk averse as opposed to the paper rich such as the majority of the dot.com and housing rich of the past 16 years.

 

[chanel]

Most of our "extra money" - retirement savings and college accounts for the kids - came from buying and selling real estate. Made a lot of sacrifices to pay the mortgages and took a whole lot of risk to put out that cash. We knew it wasn't guaranteed but we gambled and won.

Smarts and balls I'd say.

 

[Douger]

I bought 4 used mudder tires yesterday.
Maxxis Buckshot 31.5 to be precise. $150.
I could have bought a new V50..............or a thousand of them.
I'll just toss these on my 73 Land Cruiser instead.
I did drop a grand on a Saeco espresso machine for my Fiesta de Navidad.
It's justified. I grow my own coffee.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Wealthy is a relative term.
The taxation argument for instance was framed by wealthy being $250k and over.
Well, 250k a year is not wealthy...not even close.

Wealthy is relative also depending on the individual(s).
You can have a household in the midwest that makes $100k a year. They are frugal, they bought a home they can afford, vehicles are used etc. etc. They never worry about bills, their retirement is pretty solid..they are close to "wealthy".
Yet you can have another family making three times that amount, but have a home beyond their ability to afford, 2-3 new vehicles, a boat, a lakehouse etc. etc....and are virtually broke. - Not wealthy.

I have a very simple poke test for whether you are wealthy or not - do you have, in liquid funds, enough money to buy your home a 2nd time today?
The reason I think this simple test works is that a person who has six figures in liquid funds, also has at least six figures in non-liquid assets...wealthy.

 

[editec]

I suspect that on at least three occassions I made choices that did not lead to my making a whole lot more money than I have.

In two of those cases I believe I made the incorrect decision, and in the third case I made the ethical decision knowing that it meant I would not cash in on other people's mistakes.

I'm convinced that had I truly wanted to be wealthy, and been willing to pay the price for it (different prices on different occassions, of course) I could have done so.

Unless one is to the manor born, the cost of attaining great wealth is not without scarifices.

And by sacrifice I don't mean living frugally (although that obviously helps) I mean sacrifice of your time, and probably of the relationships you have with others, too.

Truly self-made very weathy people tend to be loyal to their goals, rather than to the people around them who demand their time and attention.

I don't begrudge those people their affluence since I know they usally paid a terrible price for it.

 

[Granny]

There is wealth and then there is wealth. Old money is an entirely different wealth from that of the nouveau riche.

Old money and those who have it are about 100 cuts above the nouveau riche. They are more genteel, caring, giving, and unassuming about their wealth. They don't advertise or flaunt their wealth. It's the nouveau riche that we have more exposure to - the snotty, "upwardly mobile," "he who has the most toys wins" types. They put on a good show, but there's not an ounce of humility or sincerity in anything they do and they would stop at nothing to one-up, cheat, screw, or lie about in order to be "better than thou." I know - worked with some of them for a long time and all you want to do is just slap the living shit out them because of their unbridled arrogance.

I've also had a good deal of exposure to the "old money" people. There is a huge difference in attitudes and goals.

My observation is that your observation is extremely backward. It is show statistically to be incorrect as well. It's totally backwards logically as well. Who is more likely to be more responsible and more protective of their wealth? Someone who knows what it took to earn it. Or someone who it was just given too.

Statistically speaking 80% of millionaires (which admittedly is not a lot of money these days) are first generation millionaires. That is they did not come from or inherit their wealth. The rich are typically quite frugal as well. They don't really care about status symbols. Most drive Ford pickups believe it or not. Those people you see flaunting wealth are the minority of wealthy people and more likely to be comprised of the inheritors because they have no appreciation of money. For every wealth person who seems like the just want people to know they're rich. There are 10 more whom you would never know are rich if you saw them on the street. Making wealth is one thing. Keeping it means not spending it on meaningless things.

I don't think I have it backward. Those who "have wealth handed to them" don't sit on their asses and do nothing. They continue to work and lead productive lives from one generation to the next. It's true that they are very frugal - and frugality is something that doesn't hurt any of us regardless of income. Wealth management is something learned generation to generation. And they've been taught by example to have good character, humility, charity - everybody in the community "knows" the wealthiest at least by name and they don't go around flaunting their wealth or position in life. I went to high school with a good number of their children of our generation. I worked with these people. They're a different breed.

The nouveau riche are those people who have to live in the "right" neighborhood, drive the "right" vehicle, rub elbows with the "right" people, go to the "right" schools, they are always trying to "out-do the Joneses," they are shallow and arrogant in their bragging about themselves in this pretension of what they think it is to be wealthy. They're the "wannabes."

I don't put a lot of faith in statistics, polls, scientific "proof," - those things are very easy to be skewed to show the result those involved want it to be.

 

[editec]

I define "Old Money " as that wealth that has been passed down through so many generations that the scions haven't a clue what crimes their forefathers did to get it.

 

[Samson]

It depends on how you define wealth. One theory of wealth is that the word is not a measure of money but time. Your wealth is how many months you could go without working and maintain your standard of living, to some.

I wish we could get through one thread without someone throwing out the "It depends on how you define" card.

For christssakes..... define wealth? can I say "Rich" instead?

The major division between those that get rich, and those that don't, is their tolerance for risk.

People get more wealthy when they choose to take a risk.

Of course, there is also the possiblity of getting less wealthy when taking a risk. This is why the vast majority of people are happy taking no risk, and making the best of what they have.

It is why I'm not wealthy.

Actually the rich tend to be risk averse as opposed to the paper rich such as the majority of the dot.com and housing rich of the past 16 years.

I'm not talking about the rich.

I'm speaking of those that become rich.

Stagnation, weather you are wealthy or not, requires no risk.

 

[Bern80]

I don't think I have it backward. Those who "have wealth handed to them" don't sit on their asses and do nothing. They continue to work and lead productive lives from one generation to the next. It's true that they are very frugal - and frugality is something that doesn't hurt any of us regardless of income. Wealth management is something learned generation to generation. And they've been taught by example to have good character, humility, charity - everybody in the community "knows" the wealthiest at least by name and they don't go around flaunting their wealth or position in life. I went to high school with a good number of their children of our generation. I worked with these people. They're a different breed.

You really think the Paris Hilton's of the world have enough financial where with all to manage their money on their own? All kinds of people inherit wealth, but if know one teaches them how to manage money, it will be gone fairly quickly. Of the ways large sums of wealth are attained, inheritence is in the minority and I am willng to bet inheritors that keep that money are in the minority of that.

The nouveau riche are those people who have to live in the "right" neighborhood, drive the "right" vehicle, rub elbows with the "right" people, go to the "right" schools, they are always trying to "out-do the Joneses," they are shallow and arrogant in their bragging about themselves in this pretension of what they think it is to be wealthy. They're the "wannabes."

As another poster said these people usually aren't wealthy at all. They are wannabes. All the toys are bought on credit and they have few truly liquid assets. They want to look the part of rich, even though the majority of the rich don't look that way at all, meanwhile they are piling up debt to maintain an image.

I don't put a lot of faith in statistics, polls, scientific "proof," - those things are very easy to be skewed to show the result those involved want it to be.

If you don't believe people who have studied the subject, what do you believe. That excuse doesn't really work granny. If they can find whatever they want to find, then you have the excuse to think whatever you want to think don't you?

 

[editec]

ACtually Paris Hilton is a truly BAD example of a scion who sits on her ass and does nothing.

She's created more of her personal fortune than she inherited, ya know.

Sure she did it the new old-fashioned American way, too...

She became a media whore and then parleyed her notarity into a host of consumer goods licensed under her name.

Last time I read anything about her she'd more than quadripled her inheritance though these commerical ventures.

The girl might be all the trampish things the media tells us about her, but one thing for sure, too... she's nobody's fool.

I'd like to meet her.

I suspect she's way smarter than she wants the media to believe.

 

[Granny]

There is wealth and then there is wealth. Old money is an entirely different wealth from that of the nouveau riche.

Old money and those who have it are about 100 cuts above the nouveau riche. They are more genteel, caring, giving, and unassuming about their wealth. They don't advertise or flaunt their wealth. It's the nouveau riche that we have more exposure to - the snotty, "upwardly mobile," "he who has the most toys wins" types. They put on a good show, but there's not an ounce of humility or sincerity in anything they do and they would stop at nothing to one-up, cheat, screw, or lie about in order to be "better than thou." I know - worked with some of them for a long time and all you want to do is just slap the living shit out them because of their unbridled arrogance.

I've also had a good deal of exposure to the "old money" people. There is a huge difference in attitudes and goals.

The correct term is wannabe not nouveau riche.

Fine. The nouveau riche (newly rich) are wannabes and I have referred to them as such. Their "wealth" is still new to them.

I don't think I have it backward. Those who "have wealth handed to them" don't sit on their asses and do nothing. They continue to work and lead productive lives from one generation to the next. It's true that they are very frugal - and frugality is something that doesn't hurt any of us regardless of income. Wealth management is something learned generation to generation. And they've been taught by example to have good character, humility, charity - everybody in the community "knows" the wealthiest at least by name and they don't go around flaunting their wealth or position in life. I went to high school with a good number of their children of our generation. I worked with these people. They're a different breed.

You really think the Paris Hilton's of the world have enough financial where with all to manage their money on their own? All kinds of people inherit wealth, but if know one teaches them how to manage money, it will be gone fairly quickly. Of the ways large sums of wealth are attained, inheritence is in the minority and I am willng to bet inheritors that keep that money are in the minority of that.

The nouveau riche are those people who have to live in the "right" neighborhood, drive the "right" vehicle, rub elbows with the "right" people, go to the "right" schools, they are always trying to "out-do the Joneses," they are shallow and arrogant in their bragging about themselves in this pretension of what they think it is to be wealthy. They're the "wannabes."

As another poster said these people usually aren't wealthy at all. They are wannabes. All the toys are bought on credit and they have few truly liquid assets. They want to look the part of rich, even though the majority of the rich don't look that way at all, meanwhile they are piling up debt to maintain an image.

I don't put a lot of faith in statistics, polls, scientific "proof," - those things are very easy to be skewed to show the result those involved want it to be.

If you don't believe people who have studied the subject, what do you believe. That excuse doesn't really work granny. If they can find whatever they want to find, then you have the excuse to think whatever you want to think don't you?

I think Paris Hilton and others in her category are idiots. They're pampered, spoiled rotten little brats. Yes, they inherited wealth, but they spend like wildfire without regard to the consequences. Most "celebrities" strut their stuff, purchase homes around the world, and sometimes "star" in one B-movie and voila! They're "celebrities."

It's wrong for me to use my head and think what I want to think? Thinking for yourself is not exactly an excuse. I'm just saying, for example, some scientists come to a desired conclusion based on how they interpret certain statistics. Other scientists using the same criteria reach an entirely different conclusion - "global warming" being one hotly contested issue. Polls are very much designed to reach a desired conclusion by the way questions are constructed and to whom the questions are asked. Eighty percent of the people think Obama is a candidate for Sainthood - 80% thinks he's Satan reincarnate. All depends on who's asking what to whomever.

Why shouldn't I research, read, or whatever and come to my own conclusions, i.e., think for myself what I believe is closer to the truth.

 

[Bern80]

It's wrong for me to use my head and think what I want to think? Thinking for yourself is not exactly an excuse. I'm just saying, for example, some scientists come to a desired conclusion based on how they interpret certain statistics. Other scientists using the same criteria reach an entirely different conclusion - "global warming" being one hotly contested issue. Polls are very much designed to reach a desired conclusion by the way questions are constructed and to whom the questions are asked. Eighty percent of the people think Obama is a candidate for Sainthood - 80% thinks he's Satan reincarnate. All depends on who's asking what to whomever.

Why shouldn't I research, read, or whatever and come to my own conclusions, i.e., think for myself what I believe is closer to the truth.

That's just plain old qualitative thinking. Of course we should objectively consider the accuracy of data, but to just dismiss research out of hand really is just an excuse to hang on to one's own biases. Read some books about money and wealth attainment like 'The Millionaire Next Door' or something and tell us what problems you have with their methods and/or if there is reason to believe their findings are grossly inaccurate.

 

[jillian]

In response to the myriad threads I'll just lump together and call 'evil rich people', I thought maybe we ought to change things up a bit and see if we can get some of the haters to change their thinking.

Why aren't you wealthy? Is it really because all these evil people are holding you down? Or is it because your mindset doesn't really allow for much in the way of wealth accumulation? I would contend it's the later.

I think I'm safe in saying most of us would like more money. But how many of you have made that a goal? How many of you are really working toward that goal by finding ways to increase your cash flow? I bet not many. This is what I mean when I say most people who have accumulated wealth look at money differently than the whiners. If the goal really is wealth accumulation (as oppossed to get a good job, get a good education etc.) then you need to look at all the options. And a simple truth is working hard is only one option and probably the least effective, non sensical of the bunch. Maybe if I work harder I'll make more money. But working harder means more of my time. What is the point of more money with less free time to use it? The wealthy figured this out and realize it's not about working hard for money it's about finding ways for money to work for you. It's not about working hard. It's about working smart.

The problem is we've all been duped. Most of us have grown thinking the way life is suppossed to go is get a good education, get a good job, etc. This bullshit about the rich wanting more and more and more is just that. It isn't just them that wants more. It's everyone. The only difference is they figured it out and other people haven't and the reason they figured it out is because they ditched the conventional wisdom about how life is suppossed to go.

why? are you wealthy? you know, given that you're giving all of this advice.

 

[Sallow]

Most people aren't wealthy for much of the same reason poor people aren't middle class.

They just don't know how.

Simple as that.

Well that and a mixture of "Rich People" skirting laws and being pretty ruthless. Take for example the moving company I use to work for..

Initially the owner paid everyone under the table, he didn't claim anything in taxes and functioned completely under the radar for the first few years. Then when he was making to much money..he claimed half the income he was getting. He was real dodgy with employees. On one job I was with..with him as the foreman..the customer gave me a washer/dryer as a tip..while giving him nothing. On the way back to the warehouse he said to me, "You know that washer/dryer is mine..right?". Later, as he became bigger, he hired ex-cons and other people down on their luck. He hired one guy who was a master carpenter..who single handedly built him a warehouse filled with storage bins. He wound up paying the guy like five dollars an hour for his work (off the books of course). As he became bigger, he did things like pay "ticket-time" to employees..which means you get the time on the billing sheet not the time you actually worked. He also started an "insurance company" to insure his own moves..meaning that he pocketed the additional insurance money. The rationale here was that if the claim was to big..he would dissolve the insurance company.

If there were a 10 year audit of this guy by the IRS..he would have been in some serious trouble.

 

[masquerade]

Why aren't you wealthy? Is it really because all these evil people are holding you down? No! Or is it because your mindset doesn't really allow for much in the way of wealth accumulation? Yes! I would contend it's the later.

I think I'm safe in saying most of us would like more money. But how many of you have made that a goal? How many of you are really working toward that goal by finding ways to increase your cash flow? I bet not many. This is what I mean when I say most people who have accumulated wealth look at money differently than the whiners. If the goal really is wealth accumulation (as oppossed to get a good job, get a good education etc.) then you need to look at all the options. And a simple truth is working hard is only one option and probably the least effective, non sensical of the bunch. Maybe if I work harder I'll make more money. But working harder means more of my time. What is the point of more money with less free time to use it? The wealthy figured this out and realize it's not about working hard for money it's about finding ways for money to work for you. It's not about working hard. It's about working smart.

The problem is we've all been duped. Most of us have grown thinking the way life is suppossed to go is get a good education, get a good job, etc. This bullshit about the rich wanting more and more and more is just that. It isn't just them that wants more. It's everyone. The only difference is they figured it out and other people haven't and the reason they figured it out is because they ditched the conventional wisdom about how life is suppossed to go.

Prosperity is all about mindset. Too many people carry around negative beliefs about money and have a negative reaction to it. And they get angry when their belief system about money is challenged. They are the ones who will always be wanting more and wondering why they don't have it.

Over time I have changed the way I think about money and the results have been wonderful! I deserve and willingly accept an abundance of prosperity in my life. There is enough money in the world for everyone and I open myself up to new avenues of income. I prosper wherever I turn and I know that I deserve prosperity of all kinds.

 

[Ava]

"Each of us has two distinct choices to make about what we will do with our lives. The first choice we can make is to be less than we have the capacity to be. To earn less. To have less. To read less and think less. To try less and discipline ourselves less. These are the choices that lead to an empty life. These are the choices that, once made, lead to a life of constant apprehension instead of a life of wondrous anticipation.

"And the second choice? To do it all! To become all that we can possibly be. To read every book that we possibly can. To earn as much as we possibly can. To give and share as much as we possibly can. To strive and produce and accomplish as much as we possibly can. All of us have the choice.

"To do or not to do. To be or not to be. To be all or to be less or to be nothing at all."---Jim Rohn

 

[Samson]

ACtually Paris Hilton is a truly BAD example of a scion who sits on her ass and does nothing.

She's created more of her personal fortune than she inherited, ya know.

Sure she did it the new old-fashioned American way, too....

You think Paris Hilton is the poster child for "THE new old fashioned American way" of creating individual wealth?

She is an abberition: the exception to the rule, and took very little personal risk.

There is no "new old fashioned American way." The preponderence of wealth is still created by a Vietnamese guy that buys a fishing boat, or a Korean that opens a convenience store, or a guy that builds a Micky D franchise, or some Mexican selling tacos out of a van.