By JLP | August 26, 2008
In light of our discussion last week on the definitions of “rich” and “fair,” I thought I’d share this article by Bard Hem and L.M. Sixel that I read over the weekend in the Houston Chronicle:
For some it might be $100,000. Others might say it’s $1 million, $5 million or even $100 million.
Or maybe it’s simply having a happy family.
Never mind the back-and-forth squabbling between presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama over who owns what and how much, there doesn’t seem to be a magic number that universally defines “rich.”
I really like this quote (emphasis mine):
“It’s really in the eye of the beholder,” said Mike Kreach, chief investment officer at Houston-based Amegy Bank. “Basically, the less money you have, the less money you think you need to become rich. The more money you have, the more money you think you need.”
That is so true. I remember when I was a kid, I felt ‘rich’ when I had a $10 bill in my pocket. Granted, I was a kid and didn’t know any better. I remember when my wife and I first got married, ‘rich’ to me meant a lot less money than it does now. Bottom line: wealth is relative.
Finally, think about this: An income $47,500 in the U.S. puts you in the top 1% globally.