I think it could also be that when you are in that income bracket you tend to live around and associate with people like you. You don’t feel different and in many cases the people you associate with can make much more money than you. The top 1% may be a comparatively small group but the income differential within that small group can be substantial.
So, let me get this straight. If someone doesn’t FEEL like you THINK they should FEEL then they are in denial or delusional. Wow…let’s hope this logic isn’t applied to so many things going on in today’s world.
I feel like we’re back on the first page of this thread. 
Meaning that those on the bottom part of the top 1% feel “poor” when they look at the top 0.1%, rather than feel “rich” when they look at the other 99%? Or spend all of their money on stuff like what the top 0.1% spends on (which the top 0.1% can afford, but the bottom part of the top 1% cannot really)?
I think this is a new approach - my H’s career is why we are 1%ers. He is an extremely competitive person and thinks of bringing in business/closing deals in a “I can outwork, outlast you” kind of way.
He sets monthly and yearly production goals for himself, not because we need the money, but because that motivates him and he enjoys the competition.
We are extremely grateful and thankful for our monetary good fortune, but don’t want to become complacent or smug in our lifestyle.
Although these articles can become a bit redundant, I will reference an older article that gives a broad perspective of t
how people define “rich” or “wealthy”. Everyone has their own definition. In this case, they highlight “investors” as well as other “millionaires”. Investors in particular don’t feel comfortable unless they have a large supply of cash or similar “liquidity” …nearly 25% of their net worth. The 2008 crash scared them (and many others) so much that they want to be prepared in the event it happens again…and if so, they have plenty of cash to get them through so that they won’t need to sell their stocks/bonds at a huge loss. They can hold it until there is recovery.
https://www.cnbc.com/id/100904381
Anyone remember Sherman McCoy from “Bonfire of the Vanities”? That was 1987 and he was making I think around $685,000/yr and couldn’t keep up with his own lifestyle. Poor Sherman.
Just to be clear, I certainly don’t question that DW and I are better prepared for retirement than the average couple our age. But I also agree with all those retirement advisers out there who keep warning that from a financial perspective, most Americans are simply unprepared for retirement—and that includes those approaching retirement age.
Like many of their generation, my parents retired fairly comfortably on my dad’s defined-benefit pension combined with Social Security. Those among their friends who didn’t have pensions and instead relied solely on Social Security and whatever modest savings they may have accumulated ended up really struggling financially. Many had to take low-wage jobs as long as they could work, even though their preference would have been to fully retire. Skipped meals sometimes, downsized their food budgets by trading down to day-old baked goods, the cheapest cuts of meat, and inexpensive “filler” items that were not necessarily the most nutritious, much less the tastiest. Depended on charity in the form of food banks and soup kitchens, as well as government-sponsored welfare like Food Stamps. (On the plus side it got them to church regularly because their church, in a part of Florida chockablock with retirees, served a light meal after Sunday services). Skimped on necessary medications because they couldn’t afford the co-pays. Many ended up needing to accept financial help from their adult children just to pay the bills, or moving in with their kids because they could no longer care for themselves and they couldn’t afford assisted living or in-home help. I don’t begrudge them any of those forms of assistance, but I don’t want to live that way in retirement, and I expect we won’t need to.
These days relatively few people have defined-benefit pensions, and most people’s 401(k)s and other tax-advantaged retirement accounts are badly underfunded relative to what they’ll need in retirement. Nor do most people have substantial after-tax savings and investments apart from equity in their homes. Retirement advisers traditionally said you should save at least 7 times your final annual income before you retire. Now most are saying that’s not enough; they now recommend 10 times your final annual income. Most people nearing retirement age have nowhere near that much. I do. Does that make me wealthy? Well, I suppose it makes me wealthier than most Americans my age, but that’s an awfully low bar.
Even among those who do, many are worried that the pension funds are severely underfunded.
Unfortunately, the bar is pretty low in the area of personal financial management. The reason defined-benefit pensions and Social Security were created in the first place was that most people did not save anywhere near enough to fund their retirements.
Many in the 1% don’t feel rich because their income is salary-based, and they spend a significant portion of what they earn - they have relatively little accumulated wealth, and most may still consider their home(s) one of their largest assets. Real wealth means having enough to live very well off a portion of one’s investment income (much of it tax-free) while still growing capital.
It means passing that along to one’s heirs so that they live the same way - it means enough accumulated wealth to plan for future generations and think in the very long term.
Re: #529
Seems like another way of referring to the income-rich who are not asset-rich or on the way there, due to high spending habits.
With respect to leaving to one’s heirs, not everyone is concerned about leaving an inheritance, although leaving an inheritance is a typical byproduct of having enough assets to retire without financial worries relating to unexpected extra costs or market downturns affecting the assets. But some choose to leave their estates to charity.
“Meaning that those on the bottom part of the top 1% feel “poor” when they look at the top 0.1%, rather than feel “rich” when they look at the other 99%? Or spend all of their money on stuff like what the top 0.1% spends on (which the top 0.1% can afford, but the bottom part of the top 1% cannot really)?”
I doubt they feel poor though the difference in income between the bottom quartile and the 99th percentile is likely less than the difference between the 99th and 99.2 percentile. When you associate with people in the top income brackets there can be large differences in lifestyle even though you are wealthier than 99% of the people in the US. I think it can have an impact on how rich you feel.
Some of the property tax bills mentioned here are mind blowing. We are just over $5K per year for 3K ft2 and 3/4 acre. Nice to be in the great flyover. To bad we won’t age out here. Who wants 3 levels and lots of yard when you’re 80?
We’re at $4500 for 1/2 an acre, 2400 sq ft in the MD burbs of DC! We make up for it with really high state taxes.
Seattle suburbs, 3200 sft, horse acre - $8500 tax bill, but the amount could vary by county/city based on the levies approved and home values. The same house can be valued anywhere from $500k to $2M plus within 90-min, no traffic drive.
We are in a NY suburb and you all are making me cry.
No income tax here in Texas. Property taxes on home valued about $600,000 are over $15,000.
^^About twice the property tax bill in WA, another no state income tax state.
As a couple of posts have indicated, comparing property tax bills alone make no sense unless you look at the entire tax structure for a give locale or state - local income tax, state income tax, sales tax, property tax. It’s the overall tax burden that matters, IMO.
Didn’t know we were playing “my property taxes are higher than yours”. We traded a $30k NJ property tax bill for a $4500 (now almost $5000) in NC. First year wife asked if it was a quarterly payment. Now we feel like our property taxes are high relative to others in the area.