To think they are ‘𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩’

[HansBanan]

Okay, I know it's subjective but I'm some what bored of my in-laws down playing this.
My SIL is 28, well educated, 2 children, lives in London. She's married, husband is about 40, a little older maybe, a high earner (250k ish - chief investment officer for a wealth management company).
They are mortgage free, in a large beautiful house (I'm not sure of the logistics of how this is the case but know they are). 1 car, owned outright. They have credit cards but I'm sure they pay them off monthly and mainly use them for the benefits and rewards.
Their children are young so not school age yet, but it's very clearly they sill be privately educated. I'm not sure how much the bonus her husband receives would be but let's assume it's anywhere between 25k - 125k depending on the firm.
They holiday several times a year, almost always business class.

AIBU to think that is ‘𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩’? My in-laws are all insisting that in London this is just comfortable but I don't buy it! Especially not with their mortgage free home!
I know it's not my business but it irks me

That’s a different aspiration to simply wanting to be more rich.

I'm not rich, I would like to be. In answer to your question, I would buy a lot of property, I love houses.

Course you would. Makes it even easier to sit there judging everyone.

You are ridiculous and clearly have a chip on your shoulder.

I don't think that someone who only earns six figures is in the 'top fraction of a percentage'.

What you think is irrelevant, it’s a fact.

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-11894303/Where-does-income-Britains-earners.html

I would say very comfortable

as rich is multi million pound house, millions in assets/investments/in accounts and there are plenty of people in London who are rich

it’s way above the average for most Londoners it’s because there is a large number of rich that the average wage is pushed up

Interestingly before working in the field I work in I would have defined them exactly as you, aka rich.

Now I would define them as wealthy/extremely comfortable.

Rich for me has taken another sense but that’s because I am continuously confronted to ridiculous wealth in my job and there is a stark difference between people like your SIL and people who are rich, rich. Anyone on a high salary can probably afford branded clothes if they chose to and a business class ticket, but very few could fly private, could buy a brand new sports car worth 100ks without having to budget for it etc… for me rich now is more “I don’t even need to ever think about money or budget for almost anything.” , comfortable/wealthy is: “I can afford most things but would still need to budget or save up for big ticket items and would probably have to actually consider whether certain purchases are worth it before going for it.”

So while there is no doubt that your SIL is likely rich in comparison to you and most people (me included), I would say they are more wealthy than rich as likely they don’t have unlimited funds and most of their asset is probably more linked to their home value, than anything else.

I think people are basically arguing here about the definitions of the words

rich
wealthy
comfortable
super rich

Is anyone saying that on that salary with no mortgage and a big house asset they are not ... fill in the word that suits but certainly not struggling, not poor, not in the same boat as someone earning 50k a year and paying a mortgage. Most of this thread seems to be semantics - and I wonder if it is a bit of no, no, we're not wealthy, honestly, look over there at the squirrel with the yacht.

I'm flabbergasted that people now think you have to be able to give up work in the morning with no diminution of lifestyle to be considered rich or wealthy. That certainly wasn't the case in the past. yeah of course there were the superrich - in the UK, they were the landed aristocracy, in the US the robber barons - but there were plenty of people considered very well off, living lives of great comfort.

And what's with the you can't be rich if you work for someone? Nearly everyone I know who is very wealthy (as in, yes, they could give up work without any worries), earned it. Mostly through working in Finance (venture capital particularly), IT start ups or biotech and getting fab share options.

To be rich you need capital. Could they survive with the same lifestyle without working? If the answer is "yes" then they are rich. If it's "no" then they are "well off" or "comfortable" but not "rich".

Do people realise there isn’t a formal definition? 😂

You've got the terms rich and wealthy confused. Rich means day to day, wealthy means sustainable assets and long term.

Being rich typically means having a lot of possessions and material wealth, while being wealthy is more about having sustainable and lasting wealth.

I think that’s the whole point and why everyone has a different parameter. There’s no real definition and it’s relative. When I was a kid I used to think my uncle was rich but I realise now he was very comfortable, not rich. I see people like Adele, Robbie Williams, Simon Cowell as rich, people who could literally spend every day of their lives just playing with expensive ‘toys’ (cars, houses, holidays) and not working and never feel a detrimental affect on their finances.

In the U.K. I’d be considered ‘poor’ as I live on very little (full time carer) but my outgoings are tiny so I can afford to pay my bills, buy food etc without having sleepless nights. If you compared me to someone living in a favela I would seem (and be) rich.

@jiggyjiggyjig You've got the terms rich and wealthy confused. Rich means day to day, wealthy means sustainable assets and long term.

Being rich typically means having a lot of possessions and material wealth, while being wealthy is more about having sustainable and lasting wealth.

Where do you get these definitions from? The OED says they are synonyms of each other.

But — at least in this context — you don’t know what words mean any more than the next person! You know how you use them. There is NO definition of rich (or wealthy or well off or comfortable) that states how much wealth that actually entails. And just because you don’t agree they’re rich doesn’t mean you’re automatically and objectively correct or that other people are using words wrongly.

Google is not hard to use but here is one

www.forbes.com/advisor/retirement/difference-between-rich-and-wealthy/

@MILTOBE https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rich-vs-wealthy-difference-130148569.html?guccounter=1&gucereferrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guceereferrersig=AQAAAGXw3TJwLeTbZ6g28fB477RhZuCyglLbGqVFzhXTwnXg69JyOBoG-snNtJWY3ATybOgc0tD8ve09wT3rbh2USw63rb3vOAor95WORPBeBc4ivUHMWbLsS9f2e0Jxzi1ZPGG71rpWQoNhmS35YMdsgMSekFqMmtdjXQ_PLTp79QLe

www.forbes.com/sites/andrewrosen/2023/03/16/are-you-rich-or-wealthy-it-comes-down-to-the-most-zeros/amp/

money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/family-finance/articles/are-you-rich-how-the-wealthy-are-defined

If you look at any financial site they explain

yes they are rich

There is also a massive social and possibly age-related issue here concerning how people see themselves and, by extension, their peers.

Most people in their 20s, 30s, 40s and possibly 50s would not perceive themselves as rich, no matter what their income level, as they are still aspiring to improve the quality of their lives, even if their disposable income is huge compared with the national average.

I think there is a flip as wealthy people approach their late 50s, and move into their 60s and 70s, when they are planning to give up work, and so are more comfortable with perceiving their level of wealth as acceptable and, if this is sufficiently above the national average, then they would be happy to be described as rich.

I suspect some people project this profile onto others, and so a couple in their 30s with a flash lifestyle but who at least one of which is working like a dog to mantain that lifestyle is seen as comfortable or well off, whereas look at that couple's parents who have the same lifestyle in their 60s and don't work are seen as rich.

Interesting question.