I conclude from the discussion that the term “rich” is too vague.
Not that I suggest that everyone adopt these definitions, but I usually use these words in the following meaning:
Rich—“financially independent”, you don’t have to work if you don’t want to and still have at least upper-middle-class lifestyle.
Upper-middle—not worry about money too much, it’s sufficient for comfortable and socially adequate lifestyle, but you need a high-paying job and can’t really afford expensive extravagances.
Middle—money is kinda OK, you can afford all the necessities and some (but not many) luxuries.
Lower-middle—money is tight, you can afford most necessities, but few if any luxuries
Lower—Paycheck to paycheck (if you have a job), no reserves, any crisis can thoroughly screw you up.
There are three different variables: income, consumption, and wealth, which confuse any discussion of economic class. Someone who is high-income, high-consumption, and low-wealth is probably working >40 hours a week at a professional job and worried about money, but also might be driving a fancy car and living in an expensive house.
In terms of life satisfaction, I get the sense that the primary variable that matters is wealth, but in terms of social status (for most groups), the primary variable that matters is consumption.
All true, but I wasn’t trying to construct some sort of a comprehensive social stratification scheme. It’s really just a quick list of what I mean when I’m using certain words.
Not that I suggest that everyone adopt these definitions, but I usually use these words in the following meaning:
Rich—“financially independent”, you don’t have to work if you don’t want to and still have at least upper-middle-class lifestyle.
Upper-middle—not worry about money too much, it’s sufficient for comfortable and socially adequate lifestyle, but you need a high-paying job and can’t really afford expensive extravagances.
Middle—money is kinda OK, you can afford all the necessities and some (but not many) luxuries.
Lower-middle—money is tight, you can afford most necessities, but few if any luxuries
Lower—Paycheck to paycheck (if you have a job), no reserves, any crisis can thoroughly screw you up.
I just split people into “spends less than half of what I do,” “reasonable,” and “spends more than twice what I do.” [/joke]
Yeah, these are also known as “poor bastards”, “regular people”, and “rich bastards” :-D
There are three different variables: income, consumption, and wealth, which confuse any discussion of economic class. Someone who is high-income, high-consumption, and low-wealth is probably working >40 hours a week at a professional job and worried about money, but also might be driving a fancy car and living in an expensive house.
In terms of life satisfaction, I get the sense that the primary variable that matters is wealth, but in terms of social status (for most groups), the primary variable that matters is consumption.
All true, but I wasn’t trying to construct some sort of a comprehensive social stratification scheme. It’s really just a quick list of what I mean when I’m using certain words.