AIBU to think most people have no idea how wealthy people live their lives?

[AnneValentine]

Just that really off the back of a lot of threads but most recently one where multiple people were adamant that the only way it’s possible to have no savings if you have salaries of £200k plus unless one of the couple is squirrelling savings.

Followed up with how do they pay for a broken down car with savings? Hasn’t even dawned on them that people on those salaries don’t have cars that are breaking down.

Is it so hard to believe that money literally eliminates money worries? That you can create a level of security that means savings and such aren’t needed?

Yes - we would access investments if needed.

We could in theory cut back enough each month to fund 5/6k each month for stroke rehab. But additional childcare would mean really accessing investments would make more sense.

As I have said repeatedly we don’t just have our monthly income.

But I’m wealthy (by your description of it) and worry about our car breaking. I don’t want to use insurance and effect our no claims bonus.

What do you say to me about that worry? Am I not wealthy because I worry about it? Am I not wealthy because I don’t want to rely on insurance?

I also had a cat that needed surgery costing, in the end with its rehabilitation, about 10k. I did use insurance, but they only allowed me £4k of it.

Am I not wealthy because I didn’t put my cat down?

Or, am I ‘doing wealth wrong’?

Perhaps I’m out of touch, but that’s not what I’d call wealthy. I’m in a better position than you as I take home more, don’t have any mortgages on my properties and have maxed out pensions. And while I’d certainly say I’m comfortably or even well off, wealthy to me would be if I had > £50m in net assets. Which I don’t.

I do agree you don’t need huge amounts of cash savings at higher income levels, but at I find that cash accumulates anyway because I don’t spend all my income every month, even allowing for regular planned investment, and the surplus is swept into an interest bearing account every month. Then every few months I’ll chuck it into a GIA. Which means generally if I wanted to spend £20/30/40k on a holiday, kitchen, bathroom, flooring, changing the car, some art, donating to charity or helping family the cash would be available.

I also don’t bother with insurance for anything that I couldn’t afford to just replace / fix as it’s just a waste of money. The insurance company always wins in the long term. Sure, houses/contents are covered, as is health and travel. Claims for those could be 7 figures. Cars are covered as it’s compulsory. I don’t bother with critical illness or income protection since my husband died because I pick and chose when to work anyway. Insuring animals, domestic appliances, extended warranties on cars and phones etc is unnecessary and I can’t believe anyone with a reasonable income would either, or rely on insurance, as a bill for replacing or fixing them is never going to be an issue.

But, that’s the odd thing about Mumsnet. Almost all of the problems / questions posted are just everyday middle/working class (whatever the difference between those two is) problems and neighbour issues. And yet our incomes are all in the top 1 or 2% of the Uk…strange really 🤔

So you are needing then to step outside of your income!!!! That is the whole point.

and the stroke rehab - if it’s major, it lasts for years....and years.

While it’s all relative. It’s also what I would call wealthy.....but that doesn’t matter as OP in her mind is wealthy and doesn’t need any savings.

I mean good for her!

This is such a weird thread.

Of course wealthy people have money put aside for expenses that fall outside of their monthly income.

In past 6mths I’ve had two issues with flights that necessitated spending 5 figures to remediate. Yes I put it on my credit card. And yes the money was eventually reimbursed but I needed to pay off the credit card before it was received.

I had a roof repair that needed paying, builders needed that paid by bank transfer, no option to pay by CC.

2 DC needed their uni accommodation paying (both annually in advance) bank transfers only acceptable.

that all added up to a tidy 6 figure sum, I’d be in trouble if I didn’t have savings.

Why would you be using insurance for a broken car? Did you crash it?

All of those could be covered without a savings pot.

Are you basically saying that because your investments give you such high returns, it’s better to have all potential savings tied up in investments. And if there is an ‘emergency’ you would borrow the money to pay for it because the interest is lower on borrowed money than the interest earned through investing the money that would have been in savings?

My point is that I worry about something happening to my car and the money to pay for it – irrespective of whether if it’s in an accident or fails.

Because I worry about it, having a savings pot aside from monthly outgoings and incomings is both essential and sensible for me.

Am I doing wealth wrong? And by whose opinion?

And what about my other example?

Pretty much.

But they couldn’t be covered without a savings pot for @PegasusReturns. Does that mean she’s either not wealthy or doing wealth wrong.

And again, by whose standards and/or opinion?

Just to help everyone out:

OP believes savings is a small pot, of solely cash, solely for emergency expenditure.

OP believes with a mortgaged house, a mortgaged flat (her first, now rented, that she will sell for her DC house deposits), and one income (DH's that they fritter entirely) that she is wealthy.

OP is quite entertaining.

(I'd love her to meet my parents/their close friends and come out with this. They would be so polite, because they are, but after she'd left, as PP said, they'd all be chuckling at self-labelled "wealthy" OP and her definition of savings.)

Both our cars are under warranty. It isn’t something we have to worry about.

It’s unlikely you’re doing wealth wrong. I certainly couldn’t make that judgement. The person who’s being told they’re doing it wrong is me.

Exactly this.

No. My belief is that I don’t need a savings pot for emergencies as I’ve been told repeatedly for things like a broken boiler.

Also, those were examples. If you think they’re represent the entirety of our assets that would be a mistake.

I'm at this level and this made me laugh. In the past six months my company has replaced half the executive committee and a good number of my peers at the level below c-suite. Yes, I have made plenty of roles redundant in my org but I would never think myself immune from redundancy. After all, the biggest saving to the firm is from the most senior roles

If you don’t need a savings pot, just donate any money left in your account at the end of each month from your salaries/other income and donate it to charity.

You have excess money that you put away every month.

That is, by definition, savings. If you need to fix something you have less savings, or, to put it another way, you have spent some of those savings.

This is not hard to understand.

OP. You have been told repeatedly that when people say savings pot for a boiler what this means is figuratively "access to emergency cash for emergencies". I am really concerned about your understanding of language because nobody is literally saying you need a pot (A casserole dish? A teapot, like in that old sitcom Bread?) . Likewise nobody is saying you need only cash in the pot.

You don't have a "belief that you don't need an emergency fund". You HAVE an emergency fund, spread across accounts and access to credit or cheap borrowing or whatever. It just isn't in a pot.

You are no different from the rest of us except you don't understand figurative language, or that people are describing the same principle you live by, just using examples from their own situation.

Why are you doubling down so hard???

I do understand.

What you and others haven’t understood is that my post is literally about the idea that we need savings for small costs like that. The fact that when a wealthy person says I don’t have an emergency pot someone will almost certainly say “but the car”. “The boiler”. That it’s impossible for someone to have an income where such small costs wouldn’t feature.

Insecurity? Incessant need for social climbing? Superiority complex? Inferiority complex? Generally being a bit dense?

As they say, money talks, wealth whispers.

I’m not talking about YOUR cars. I’m talking about MY worries about MY cars.

I say this specifically because you are categorically making a blanket claim about high earners/wealthy people.

And posters here aren’t saying you are doing wealth wrong. They are saying you are wrong to make a blanket statement as to how wealthy people live their lives, how they treat their finances and whether or not they worry about money.

Your original post and many posts after it almost literally say ‘wealthy people don’t worry about money because they don’t have to’.

Posters do not care that you personally don’t worry about money. They care that you are categorically applying your mentality to a mass of other people.

You do not have the authority to claim what wealthy people worry about and what they need in order to feel secure.

I am wealthy. I worry about financial security. A large liquid cash savings pot outside of my current account is essential to my feeling of security.

So with that your theory, or opinion, on how wealthy people live their lives is blown out of the water.

So all we’re left with is … you don’t personally worry about money and you do not personally feel you need a savings pot.

And if that’s all your saying then your whole point has been negated.

@AnneValentine how much do you earn vs. your husband? What percentage is his income vs. yours?

I earn less than you but savings are really important to me. I value saving very highly. It was ingrained into me as a child and growing up, I was taught - no matter how much income - to be savvy about having access to money if I could.
I always have access to an instant pot of my money for whatever reason. It makes me feel safe and comfortable.