Looking wealthy or being wealthy?

[Animallover87]

AIBU to think there's a difference between looking wealthy and being wealthy?

I think understanding the difference, between being wealthy and looking wealthy, is key to changing your financial situation. Our culture today almost encourages looking wealthy as being the ultimate aspirational target.

With beautiful Instaperfect homes, 2 shiny new cars, amazing garden makeovers, £1200 phones, and £200 trainers being shoved down our throats, many people desperately want a piece of that. Reality TV and social media encourage us to have that perfect lifestyle and it can be really difficult to avoid the trap of looking wealthy.

But while some can afford this lifestyle, many of these "Joneses" simply cannot. They might look wealthy, however, they are anything but. Many of them are up to their eyeballs in debt, are continually spending more than they earn, and constantly worrying about how they can afford to pay their bills.

Have you ever felt the pressure to spend to keep up with others? Or are you able to resist the spending but feel jealous of others?

@Fragrantandfoolish

Ah maybe I have. I thought top 10% was 110-150k a year?

Some really odd comments on here. Some folks being quite scathing and just coming across as bitter when describing their lifestyles and others declaring themselves Wealthy when they are far from it.

wealth is clearly a contentious issue for some , be it how the wealthy are viewed to the desire to be wealthy,

also the definition of wealth clearly varies. Schwabs defined it last year as a min net worth of $1.9 million , so what’s that about 1.5 in pounds? Clearly it’s not a hard line and property can mislead, the dictionary describes it as having an abundance of money .

I am not utterly convinced rhe people declaring themselves wealthy fall into this bracket, they may just be better off than many others, but that doesn’t make you wealthy

@Fragrantandfoolish

I definitely wouldn’t consider us wealthy but I’m continuously told we are. To be honest, I attempt to avoid talking about finances outside of an anonymous forum because of this. We still struggle to pay for things, and have rough times but are made to feel that we shouldn’t be and it just makes me feel crap.

We have a combined income of 120k. I would consider ‘rich’ in the million mark too.

the area and when you bought your property matters a great deal. How many kids and are you paying full childcare for them or are they in school. Are you helping out family members who are choosing between eating and heating etc.

in london 120k would get you a 2 bed flat and childcare for 1 child.

this would mean that someone on the state pension in a 1.4 million house would be 'rich' but you wouldn't be! that surely does not make sense, even if you were renting a small flat on 120k (and there are people like that in London), your disposable income is probably higher than someone on state pension, you can afford to do more nice things than someone on state pension but living in a terraced house in London!

The truth is neither of you are rich, rich people have assets other than their primary home which would amount to around a million. Or their primary home is very expensive and they can easily downsize without losing lots of space. Like someone with a 1.4 million house would have to downsize to a 400k flat to really have lots of money and that is a significant downgrade. Rich people don't need to downgrade in order to have income.

in london 120k would get you a 2 bed flat and childcare for 1 child.

Depends when you bought though. In-laws house is worth 2m now.

Top 10% on or above 60k is wealthy.

is that before or after tax?
is that just for those on paye?

I'm wealthy, but I absolutely don't look it. No matter how much 'insta' is shoved at me. Ultimately, I have a choice, follow others or blaze my own path.

I choose the latter.

Do you try to keep up with others OP?

The stereotype that very rich dress in mud encrusted tweeds and wellies is rather out dated. If they do (in the country) those tweeds will be from Harvey Nicks or Saville Row at least!
Whenever I go collect my daughter from school (Belgravia) you can just see it - not from bling but from the cut of the suits, the grooming, and way the people carry themselves. You just know that dress or jacket costs the same as half your entire wardrobe. It's an attitude and aura.

Who really gives a fuck what trainers someone wears, or what car someone drives?

I remember these things being discussion points when I was 14. It all faded away pretty soon afterwards.

@TruckerBarbie what I mean is, OP has been given a brief and is clearly very lazy.

Most of the time no, I don't really care. I have some savings in an emergency fund and would rather have that than fancy gear.

I just look at other people and wonder how they afford all the fancy stuff and sometimes feel a bit frumpy in comparison. Maybe I am a bit insecure as a PP pointed out but probably only when I'm having a bad day.

(Still not a journalist, just thought it would be an interesting discussion. I'm a teacher)

The OP message really sounds like the opening to a GCSE "writing to persuade" piece.

The 'battered Volvo and ancient tweeds covered in labrador hair' trope beloved of these threads are usually the asset rich but cash poor types. Wealthy on paper but not in reality. Stressing about how to fund the roof repairs on the Elizabethan manor house.

OP has been given a brief and is clearly very lazy.

That's my impression too.

The truly wealthy wouldn’t get carpet; they would invest in quality wood or karndean type flooring. Your friends are lying to themselves if they think showing off with new carpets regularly makes them look wealthy; the wealthy people that I know don’t have carpet.

@Animallover87 “People will believe anything if you're finely dressed.” – John Dickens.

But in reality… his son Charles Dickens described his father, John, as "a jovial opportunist with no money sense", unable to satisfy his creditors, on 20 February 1824 John Dickens was imprisoned in the Marshalsea Debtors' Prison under the Insolvent Debtors Act of 1813, because he owed a baker, James Kerr, £40 and 10 shillings.

I would rather be wealthy than look wealthy (more chance of being robbed for wrist watch etc.) although looking wealthy might get me served quicker in the local posh farm shop

Dat the truth here too. 😁

Why are so many people on this thread trying to suggest they are actually super wealthy? 😂
’I drive and old car and wear shit clothes because I’m wealthy’

I thought that too. Falling over themselves to tell us that nobody would ever suspect that they are rich because they drive a 12 year old Renault Picasso and wear clothes from M&S or whatever, little does anybody know that they have got loads of savings! Not much stealth in that boast, eh?

In fact, it’s a double boast. “I’m really rich and I’m DEAD CLASSY”.

Also I don't see I as inherently better to be rich but frugal. I'm not sure why it's often paraded as a virtue.

I'm not sure why it's often paraded as a virtue.

Omg, yes why is it a thing?!

It shows patience and self-control. Both are virtues. Goes with the saying, “a fool and their money are soon parted”.

There’s virtue in discerning the difference between ‘want’ and ‘need’.

@HardRock It shows patience and self-control. Both are virtues.

There is no virtue in running around in dirty, dog hair covered, moth eaten cashmere like the mumsnet view of ‘the wealthy’.

Actually ‘self control’ to the point that all your clothes are worn out and the roof of your mansion is falling down is either miserly or just not actually having enough cash.

Exactly. Taken to the extremes its not a virtue at all.

I know people who grew up desperately miserable due to wealthy but miserly parents, for instance