iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Most Americans Say $150,000 Annual Income Makes You Rich: Gallup

Rich Median Income

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 12/09/11 10:34 AM ET Updated: 12/09/11 10:34 AM ET

It's not only one percenters that Americans consider rich.

More than half of those recently polled by Gallup said an income of no more than $150,000 would qualify that person as rich. When asked how much money per year would be necessary for them to consider themselves "rich," 53 percent mentioned an income of $150,000 or less, and 71 percent said an income of $300,000 would be enough.

Wealth marketing HNW Inc. considers an income of more than $350,000 per year enough to push someone into the one percent. But they also say most one percenters aren't aware of their exceptional status.

That may be because of extreme levels of income inequality among the richest of Americans. Steeper inequality exists among those in the top tenth of the income scale than elsewhere in the income spectrum, leading to a comparative sense of poorness for many wealthy Americans, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center cited by The New York Times.

Overall income inequality has spiked over the past three decades. While incomes of the poorest Americans grew by only 20 percent between 1979 and 2007, the incomes of the top one percent skyrocketed by 275 percent, according to a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office.

"We have now returned to Gilded Age levels of inequality," Josh Bivens, an economist at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, said in response to the CBO report.

A study by Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley, found that as of 2007, the top ten percent of American workers earned 49.7 percent of all wages, a level he said is "higher than any other year since 1917." That could be bad for the economy as a whole. A September report by the International Monetary Fund pinpointed a relationship between higher levels of income inequality and weaker economic growth.

Partly because the wealthy keep so much of their wealth in stocks, a third of one percenters fell back into the 99 percent during the financial crisis and subsequent recession, according to a recent Federal Reserve report. Robert Frank, a senior writer at the Wall Street Journal, predicts that the wealthiest Americans will be very defensive in their investments next year, leading to less job creation.

It's not that all millionaires oppose paying higher taxes. Indeed, a recent survey found the majority of millionaires surveyed would be willing to hand over a higher share of their income to the government.

"The wealthiest can afford to pay more in taxes. That's a part of the deal. That makes sense. I don't know anyone that doesn't agree with that," Ruth Porat, Morgan Stanley's chief financial officer, said on Saturday. "The wealth disparity between the lowest and the highest continues to expand, and that's inappropriate."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
It's not only one percenters that Americans consider rich. More than half of those recently polled by Gallup said an income of no more than $150,000 would qualify that person as rich. When asked h...
It's not only one percenters that Americans consider rich. More than half of those recently polled by Gallup said an income of no more than $150,000 would qualify that person as rich. When asked h...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,431
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (36 total)
09:36 PM on 03/24/2013
and also i don't need to go to some ball games to make million dollar athletes and billon dollar owners richer
09:35 PM on 03/24/2013
if people would stop going to clubs and trying to show off with 20 dollar shots they could live like kings on 150000 a year even with children you don't need a benz and you don't have to buy something that comes out right away and cook your own meals and yes you can prepare the night before and cook in minutes
06:28 PM on 12/19/2011
Is it Barron's that does the story, "What is Rich?"; they define 'beer&peanuts' rich as around $130-150,000, only they delineate this type of income as 'expendable vs. nonexpendable'. I suppose most polled look at this sum of money and think that if they had that much money 'to spend a year, they'd consider themselves rich. Of course, those that make this sum don't typically squander it.
The jist of my point is there is truth to the adage, "rich people are rich for a reason."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andman0121
10:42 AM on 12/13/2011
Um, I make a little less than $40K a year and I would consider $100K as being rich! No one on this planet deserves to make more than a million dollars a year, PERIOD. Income caps need to be made so that company profits can trickle down to the rest of us lowly workers.
04:05 AM on 02/13/2012
And if you worked hard and finally got to the point where you were in one of those extremely high paying jobs, I doubt that you would still feel the same...

It's called "class envy"...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bzimmerman
10:18 AM on 12/13/2011
I am so sorry that you can not live on $150,000 a year! How about the million who live on $20,000 or less?
Try paying rent when you work at retail for $8 per hour! Put your kids through school, pay for a car (not a Lexus or Mercedes)!
I am fracking tired of hearing how hard it is to keep your brats in private schools and ivy league colleges. I don't give a dogs tail about how hard it is to make your $500 car payment! My rent is less than that!
I don't care that you can't afford that 4 week cruise in the Caribbean, I can't afford to go the shore!
I don't want to hear about your worries that $500,000 in your IRA may not be enough to retire on, Try saving when you make $10 per hour!
What makes you think I can afford $700 a month for health insurance through COBRA, after I lose my job?
Whether I have $5 in my pocket, or $50,000, a loaf of bread still costs $4!
And yet, you think I am a ne'er do well, just sucking at the teat of government welfare!
Next time you sit in a restaurant, remember that server is probably making less than minimum wage, and most likely working part time!
03:30 AM on 02/13/2012
If you are paying $4 for a loaf of bread, you are probably overpaying for other things also... You might want to seriously look at your financial decisions in life... I've gone from the bottom to being fairly comfortable financially... I've had to sell blood plasma to have money for cans of cold pork and beans... There was a time in my life where I would have been glad to have had a minimum wage job... I have been what you now call "homeless", but I never accepted food stamps, unemployment, welfare, or any other sort of government or private aid... I just considered it a time when I was "just down on my luck" and I knew that somehow, it would eventually get better... Today, I have a bit over $1M in investments in stocks and my house and cars are completely paid off... I don't consider this enough to retire on though... It used to be that $1M was some sort of ultimate goal that would allow you to retire comfortably... Thanks to inflation, the $1M that you thought that you would need in 1970 now works out to be about $5-6M... And the way that the government keeps devaluing the currency with their inflation, by the time I have $5-6M, I will need $10M to be equivalent to the 1970 $1M figure...
03:18 AM on 12/13/2011
I am a young and beautiful woman from US. i just think here is a good place to meet friends. i just wonder if i can meet a rich daddy here, because i am at the beginning of my career and i need someone's support..iuploaded my hot photos on ----[SugarDadMeet.C óM ]----under the name babylove2011 , maybe you want to check out my photos firstly!I've seen and heard people blame capitalism for this huge disparity of wealth in this country. Taxing the rich more will not fix the problem. How about ending the federal reserve? Or stop fighting senseless wars? Smaller federal government­? End the TARP? What I'm getting at is that the things mentioned above have destroyed the u.s. dollar thus destroying the middle class. Any thoughts?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JAT3
For every action there is a reaction...
03:43 AM on 12/13/2011
Taxing the rich without paying for in 10yrs doesn't help the deficit that you and I still pay for on our little checkes, you agree? Govt can be smaller/efficient but so can some companies but greener and pay better wages then going overseas....those incomes help make a middleclass.

Banks need to loan to smaller businesses, there needs to be R&D programs by the govt in conjunction with private.

There has to be stiff oversight/regulation so bubble dont occur. True jail time and/or significant fines to persuade those not to commit crime and take advantage of people, so there is confidence in the market/wallst.

End the Fed Res? Who has that power?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andman0121
10:43 AM on 12/13/2011
Go away, you leech.
01:21 AM on 12/13/2011
There is a difference between rich and wealthy. People with wealth, like Warren Buffett, pay less tax in America because they make their money off of the money that they have in the form of capital gains, not the money they are paid in the form of wages. A family earning $150K may spend like they are "rich", but very few can save like they are "wealthy". In some instances, like ROTH IRA limitations, the deck is actually stacked against allowing you to save to build wealth even if you try. The overwhelming majority of Americans would be much better off, as would our conomy, if profits on investments other than 401K's and IRA's were just taxed as regular income.
03:42 AM on 02/13/2012
No, we would be better if we just switched to a consumption tax (e.g. FairTax.org) instead of the current repressive income based tax. I suspect I would probably pay more with a consumption tax, but it would be worth it just to not have to spend a month collecting records and doing my taxes each year.

One of the problems for most families earning $150K per year is that they don't necessarily live within their means. Neither does the government, but that's a whole 'nuther story... People get 30 year mortgages and take the entire 30 years to pay it off... They get loans on cars and take the entire loan term to pay them off. They buy a new car just because the current one is not the latest style. Couples buy houses that take both of them working to be able to make the payments. I have never bought a house that required two incomes to meet the mortgage payments. I have never let a mortgage go for more than 10 years even though they were 30 year mortgages. Of course this was more important back then when the interest rates were so much higher than they are today. I either pay cash for my cars or I pay them off as soon as possible. I pay my credit cars in full each month. Why should I make the banks rich by paying any more interest to them than is absolutely necessary?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrew Harvey
Don't F with the Jesus
12:55 AM on 12/13/2011
Has is occurred to anyone that wealth increases with age?

They wage gap is higher than its ever been because our population is older than its ever been.
03:44 AM on 02/13/2012
The secret to retiring with $1M in assets is to start saving as much as you can EARLY...

Living below your means kinds of helps also...
10:19 PM on 12/12/2011
I've seen and heard people blame capitalism for this huge disparity of wealth in this country. Taxing the rich more will not fix the problem. How about ending the federal reserve? Or stop fighting senseless wars? Smaller federal government? End the TARP? What I'm getting at is that the things mentioned above have destroyed the u.s. dollar thus destroying the middle class. Any thoughts?
07:12 PM on 12/16/2011
I like Ron Paul a lot better than most politicians today, but I'm sick of hearing "end the Fed!" We've had three national banks in this country, all federally chartered. The first bank's charter was allowed to expire, and almost immediately the country began to experience severe inflation and economic doldrums. The second bank was ended by Andrew Jackson, and most major economists agree that its demise directly led to the Panic of 1837(among the worst depressions in US history). Between the end of the second national bank and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, the US had an intensified "boom-and-bust" business cycle, and it is generally accepted that following the creation of the Federal Reserve, the US economy was vastly more stable than the period preceding its charter. You can argue that the policies of the federal reserve have been questionable lately, but to suggest eliminating the third national bank of the US is one of the worst economic ideas I've ever heard.
03:47 AM on 02/13/2012
For the rest of us, when we are in financial hard times, we decrease our spending since we can't easily increase our income... Why is it that the government can't figure out this simple financial tactic? The Founding Fathers did not intend for the US to become this monstrosity of a bureaucracy -- they intended for the federal government to be small and the states to have more power.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:28 PM on 12/12/2011
150k is DEFINITELY not wealthy.
07:04 PM on 12/12/2011
Depends on where you live.
12:20 AM on 12/14/2011
Thats correct, property values have drooped so low in some areas a person with 150,000 income could buy 20 houses a year and rent them out.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
silverstreet
All you need is love
08:20 PM on 12/12/2011
Upper middle class. Definitely upper
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mtn viking
This space for rent.
04:58 PM on 12/12/2011
Those at the top of the food chain have forgotten who the real job creators are. Jobs are created by consumers. I won't add staff at my business until I have to many customers for present staff to handle. I know that if I pay my staff well, they are more likely to become consumers of my product, which in turn makes me more money.

Henry Ford paid his workers double the going rate for a shorter work day. This was in addition to institutin­g the assembly line which meant that workers required less skill. Why did Ford think it was a good idea to pay workers more money for less work and a job that required less skill?

That's the problem with America today. To many people have forgotten the answer to that question.
oilfield
large employer per obamacare
10:58 PM on 12/12/2011
there are other businesses that dont have to wait for demand to invest.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mtn viking
This space for rent.
02:28 PM on 12/13/2011
Such as?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Scott Fraley
04:37 PM on 12/12/2011
It takes money to make money, and after a couple hundred years as a Capitalist nation, the money has settled into the hands of the families that will likely keep it for some time.

Conservatives feel that this is the just way of handling things and blame the consequences of their ideology on the victims of it: those not born into wealth or not exceptional enough to escape poverty during a recession.

There is no option, short of revolution that will serve as anything more than a bandaid to this problem.
10:45 PM on 12/12/2011
Very few of the uber-wealthy were born into wealth.

What is your excuse for being part of the uber-stupid?
02:42 AM on 12/13/2011
My sense is that the truth lies in the middle, but while you are being mean- just an observation- there are four people called Walton, and three people called Mars in the Forbes top 20.
oilfield
large employer per obamacare
10:59 PM on 12/12/2011
there is no finite pie.
04:34 PM on 12/12/2011
Lets get serious, people. $150K/year is alot of money. Regardless of where you live.
Consider that the typical work year is about 2020 hours. Based on the average 8 hr day, 40 hr work week, 52 week year. At $150K/year, that is about $75 per hour.
Considering that the legally mandated minimum wage is $7.25/hr, at more than 10x the minimum wage, $150K is making BANK.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:32 PM on 12/12/2011
Most people making a salary of 150k are not being paid hourly, if they were being paid hourly you would have to sum it up at at least 65 hours a week.

68 hours * 52 weeks = 3536 hours

150k/3536 hours = 42/hour

That's definitely not rich, consider how much a most lawyer charge an hour. Wealth, true wealth, begins at a combined income of 450k/year as this is when all the various doors of society begin to open.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
silverstreet
All you need is love
08:22 PM on 12/12/2011
150K is upper middle class -- no doubt about it. You can live very well on 150K a year -- even in NYC
07:10 PM on 12/12/2011
You cannot blanketly say that $150K is "bank" without considering what a person does for a living and where that living is done. On the east coast $150K will make you comfortable providing that you are not the sole or major provider for a family of more than 3. Childcare alone puts a major dent in that kind of income. Added with the cost of living for the area etc.

Regardles, the problem is not how much one makes, the problem is what one can do with what one makes. The dollar does not go as far as it did 5-7 years ago.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mtn viking
This space for rent.
03:51 PM on 12/12/2011
Look at the demographics for income across the country. Compared to what most people are earning, $150k is rich.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:34 PM on 12/12/2011
150,000 is different for each family and each state. If you live in NY, CA or even areas of Florida 150,000 is not rich. If that income is combined with two salaries for house hold and if you own your own business where every penny for healthcare has to come from you that amount is not rich. I consider it upper middle class for most families.