[PrasannaDhana]

My idea of wealth is

Basic needs + mental peace + healthy body/family + work that makes you happy

Anything over that doesn't really matter, unless you want to impress others, who don't care anyway.

[libranof1987]

There cannot be one answer to this; anyone who says "this number is it" / "let me reach at salary or savings of x rupees and then I'm rich" is fooling themselves more than they are others.

Wisdom is realizing that being rich isn't just about the money in the bank or the car on the porch, but a far more comprehensive view. The biggest mistake a lot of people seem to be making is, being fixated on a $ amount as an achievement or a life goal.

I use being rich (= money) and success interchangeably.

Who's rich here:

- someone with a million $ in the bank but no family to speak of
- someone with half a million but away from the family, in pursuit of success in the career
- someone with a few hundred thousand but home every evening for dinner, and healthy - physically and mentally

There has to be so much more to life than just thinking about the number of commas on your bank statement. Also, what is "rich" anyway. They moment you think you are rich "enough" - you'd think about the next goalpost, and compare yourself to the milestone above it - that's just natural human psychology.

Everyone has different agendas and ambitions in life - and hence, the marker of how rich they are would differ for each.

[aadya]

I look at it like this, being rich means able to live without having to do any real job. I voted 5 crores of assets. I mean liquid or income yielding assets. I assume 1 crore would go into a decent 3 bhk apartment in the outskirts/suburban/tier two city. Balance 4 crore if intelligently invested in secure bonds/PF/NSC etc should yield about 7%PA which should fetch 28 lakhs per year, equating to about 2-2.25 Lakhs per month. with a decent household expenditure of 75k, 75k into further investment to beat inflation and 75k for discretionary expenditure.
This should give a content upper middle class life. But content is what we are not and that is what causes inflation in - money and ego.

[Nalin1]

In India it is very simple.

If you have a car, you are rich .

[msdivy]

I will go by the definition below.
Car: Rich
Two-wheeler: Middle-class
None: Poor

The poll is measuring affluence and there is no limit.

Originally Posted by Samurai

To define in vehicle terms: Households whose primary transportation is a two-wheeler, they are the real middle class of India. Those who can't even afford a motorized two-wheeler are the poor.

If you own a car, you are not middle class in India. Plenty of people find this hard to accept.

[hdus001]

Originally Posted by libranof1987

There cannot be one answer to this; anyone who says "this number is it" / "let me reach at salary or savings of x rupees and then I'm rich" is fooling themselves more than they are others.

...

Who's rich here:

- someone with a million $ in the bank but no family to speak of
- someone with half a million but away from the family, in pursuit of success in the career
- someone with a few hundred thousand but home every evening for dinner, and healthy - physically and mentally

Big +1 to all this. The older I get, the more I realise that money beyond a point has very little incremental value. Finding time for things I enjoy is a lot more valuable for me now than more money. I'm healthy in my 40's now, but am well aware that inevitably age-related health issues will creep up and put an end to several things I enjoy now, so time is at a premium. This rings true looking at my dad and uncles too who spend the best parts of their lives chasing wealth and then were too old to enjoy all that.

In our initial couple of years of marriage, we had a very entry level car, but we used it a lot, had so many nice driving vacations. Now, many moons later, we have relatively very nice cars, but don't drive much and very rarely go for driving vacations. So what the point of wanting nicer cars? Besides, if you leave aside external factors like road presence, perceived status etc (which don't mean much to me) there's not much these days in luxury cars that aren't there in cheaper cars, and I say this as a driving enthusiast.

My wife recently reduced her working hours to 4 days a week resulting in a proportional decrease in income for her, but she has been much more relaxed and happier since then. If I had such an option, I'd happily consider it too. All this unending career advancement/achievement b**sh*t gets old real fast

[d3mon]

If you just want to be rich, you can never have enough money to be satisfied. As many other people on this thread have commented, the goal posts just keep moving as you get closer and closer to your older goals, and this is not just due to inflation.

If you want to be happy, you only need a certain amount of money that makes your life easy. Tons of studies have shown that your happiness plateaus after you have a "sufficient" amount of money. Of course, what's sufficient for you may be different that what's sufficient for me, but going by the below charts (in the US context), the range of sufficiency lies around 80-160K USD.


So what is the average income sufficiency number in India? I don't know. Maybe it's 15L , maybe it's 30L but it's certainly not 1-2cr per annum. Money buys happiness only up to a certain point, which is far, far lower than the criterion to be classified as "rich" as per this thread.

Attachment 2435058

[Bhokal]

I for some reason can't take part in poll (maybe I have not posted enough?).

Anyone with 5+ Crore assets, should fall in rich category and should be able to spend luxurious life even in the metros.

[anjan_c2007]

More than assets I believe a regular, more than decent monthly or annual income above a certain threshold is desirable to label someone as rich.

Assets owned should yield a steady income regularly. Else, one may own crores of assets without any income yield from these which leads to these assets crumbling. Like for instance, the house we live in may be a very valuable asset and may last us more than our lifetimes. If it does not yield any income or if the owner does not have a more than decent income by virtue of the work he does, it has no meaning. Hence, if someone lives in a 50 crore worth house it is truly an asset but he may not sell it ever during his lifetime. He must have a more than decent income.

Hence assets and income are both desired. And if assets are not much but income is more than decent such cases too qualify for the person to be called "rich." Assets can be made subsequently with a steady income flow.

[v1p3r]

Interesting that only three people have pointed out that assets should either be liquid or yield income.

I would assume someone is wealthy if the value of their primary owned residence is a small fraction of their net worth, not a majority of it.

[V.Narayan]

Thank you for sharing these charts and your different perspective. Not sure what the source is or what methodology has been used to arrive at these conclusions or at these $ points. But we'll keep that aside for now. Or is it that the author of the charts had a pre-determined conclusion and then fitted the research to suit that! - just my opinion. I'll toss in a different perspective if you permit.

Originally Posted by d3mon

If you just want to be rich, you can never have enough money to be satisfied. As many other people on this thread have commented, the goal posts just keep moving as you get closer and closer to your older goals, and this is not just due to inflation.

This is an assumption and holds largely true while you are on the climb. And yes, a significant proportion remain addicted to this regardless of how much they earn. But an equally significant proportion do take a call that they have reached a comfort zone of income & wealth and the hassle-effort-stress-health burn needed to increase that is not worth the returns - the philosophy of I have X income, Y net worth, & Z years of life expectancy, no point chasing the next million. Bear in mind most who get rich on their own steam, especially, are reasonably clever {even if not intellectual or well educated}, most are shrewd {some a bit too much} and all are usually competent & nimble at self-preservation.

If you want to be happy, you only need a certain amount of money that makes your life easy. Tons of studies have shown that your happiness plateaus after you have a "sufficient" amount of money

Money buys happiness only up to a certain point, which is far, far lower than the criterion to be classified as "rich" as per this thread.

This is a myth perpetuated by children's fairy tale story tellers of the cruel rich and the happy poor family kind. Money isn't meant to buy happiness or health or peace of mind or love. Though it does help towards all of these - it is a great hygiene factor. Money is a tool to buy convenience, comforts, safety, protection, status, ego, power and to help pull your chestnuts out of the fire if you get into trouble. It is never a tool for acquiring a spouse's love or a child's respect or meditative calm. Money doesn't matter say some but trust me don't believe that till you have enough!

Of course, what's sufficient for you may be different that what's sufficient for me, but going by the below charts (in the US context), the range of sufficiency lies around 80-160K USD.

$80 to $ 160K in USA sounds way too low for any of this in my opinion. Is this the per capita of each member of a family of 4 or the total income of the family. If the latter $80k for a family of 4 in USA is their equivalent of a low middle class income.

[chaitanyakrish]

Let's not call Rich or Poor, we can use terms like financially independent.
Example, if someone has 1Cr, he can go to a tier 2 or 3 city and live a peaceful healthy life or buy an entry level flat in a Tier 1 city and live pay check by pay check or buy a big car and pay EMIs.
There are many things that can be done with such an amount.
with the same amount of rent some people pay in cities like Bengaluru, Mumbai etc, 1 or 2 families can live peacefully in a rural area.

Being Rich in my view is, be financially independent to fulfill our needs for the years in retirement,child education,home etc and having adequate health insurance and maintain a healthy lifestyle.

As how much money is required to be financially independent depends on the lifestyle we choose, its difficult to pick a ballpark number for being called rich, however if the above conditions are fulfilled, then they're rich !!

[Tapo]

I would consider myself to be rich if I could take time off from work and be able to go anywhere without having to worry about my bills. Till that time the amount of money I have or assets I own doesn't matter. I equate financial independence with richness.

[vj_torqueaddict]

Didn't vote. Wanted to avoid posting as well. But I thought I should anyways. The poll is too materialistic in nature according to me. Being Rich does not have anything to do with money the sooner we realise the better for humanity. Hope next generation doesn't screw up like we did. GNH index of Bhutan is truly ground breaking and hope humanity accepts it.

[Thilak29]

What would you consider the threshold for being called rich?

Healthier days
Deeper sleep
Loving family
Basic amenities
Curiosity to learn

If any of the above is compromised, I would consider myself poor for that period.