Define rich and poor.

[Viker]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words. I've seen too many people in life who call themselves "poor" when in fact they have a decent car, a roof over their heads, bills paid and enough food to sustain them and their family. I would hardly call them poor, more like middle class and whiny.

On the flip side, I don't know if or just don't consider myself "rich". I have everything I need taken care of. I have tons in savings. And I can get nearly anything I want without breaking out the black magic for that. I would suppose I am wealthy.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words. I've seen too many people in life who call themselves "poor" when in fact they have a decent car, a roof over their heads, bills paid and enough food to sustain them and their family. I would hardly call them poor, more like middle class and whiny.

On the flip side, I don't know if or just don't consider myself "rich". I have everything I need taken care of. I have tons in savings. And I can get nearly anything I want without breaking out the black magic for that. I would suppose I am wealthy.

I think it would be safe to say that there are gradations of wealth and poverty, rich and poor. I know I studied these categories back when I was in grad school, but I recall little of that...there were several definitions advanced by different organizations, groups, and researchers, sometimes constructed to account for different aspects. I do recall that the economic and social work and social psychological models, for example, differed substantially. What I recall most was that for my dissertation, I had to pick one or another group's definition and apply it to my data as best I could. It didn't end up being meaningful in my particular study.

Sorry I can't be of more help.

 

[Viker]

I think it would be safe to say that there are gradations of wealth and poverty, rich and poor. I know I studied these categories back when I was in grad school, but I recall little of that...there were several definitions advanced by different organizations, groups, and researchers, sometimes constructed to account for different aspects. I do recall that the economic and social work and social psychological models, for example, differed substantially. What I recall most was that for my dissertation, I had to pick one or another group's definition and apply it to my data as best I could. It didn't end up being meaningful in my particular study.

Sorry I can't be of more help.

That's okay. I remember covering this in both pre-grad and later in grad school myself. Things to factor in would be social disparity, education, location, if parents were poor, etc.

I've talked to people born, raised and still living in "the hood" that either do or don't consider themselves poor.

I'm under the impression that there actually are multiple definitions or perspectives on the two.

 

[JustGeorge]

Poor: does not have the means to provide for themselves and their family. They must make use of government programs or the charity of others

Rich: has more than they need to live, excessive luxury or excessive amount in the bank past what they would need to sustain oneself or their family

I think most of us fall in between. I feel I do, though I do use state provided health insurance.

 

[Heyo]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words. I've seen too many people in life who call themselves "poor" when in fact they have a decent car, a roof over their heads, bills paid and enough food to sustain them and their family. I would hardly call them poor, more like middle class and whiny.

On the flip side, I don't know if or just don't consider myself "rich". I have everything I need taken care of. I have tons in savings. And I can get nearly anything I want without breaking out the black magic for that. I would suppose I am wealthy.

Rich: having more wealth/income/socially valued tokens than most of your neighbours.
Poor: having less wealth/income/socially valued tokens than most of your neighbours.

Wealth is a relative value - and it can change widely by considering who your "neighbours" are. E.g. having a computer, internet access and the time to post on RF makes you wealthy in comparison to the world population.

 

[RestlessSoul]

In purely material terms, this can be easily measured; any money or resources you have left after all your bills are paid, is the measure of your wealth. While the extent to which your income and resources fall short of your necessary outgoings, is the measure of your poverty.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Rich: having more wealth/income/socially valued tokens than most of your neighbours.
Poor: having less wealth/income/socially valued tokens than most of your neighbours.

Wealth is a relative value - and it can change widely by considering who your "neighbours" are. E.g. having a computer, internet access and the time to post on RF makes you wealthy in comparison to the world population.

This observation I think, draws attention to a psychological problem prevalent in consumer driven free market economies; that we are unable to distinguish between our needs and our wants. 21st Century capitalist models depend upon persuading us that we need all sorts of things which in reality we only want. While we are wanting we are not content, and neither are we grateful. We’re hamsters on the wheel, frantically peddling in the hope that the next job, the next house, next car, next man or woman, will bring us the satisfaction we need, and make us whole.

 

[ChristineM]

I'll go for the financial aspect.

Poor, being unable to afford the next meal, a roof over your head and/or warmth when needed.

Rich, having more than enough to buy the poor guy food etc and not missing the money.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I've never been what one might ever consider as being rich but whilst working I have never been limited by the money I earned, so as to be able to do all the activities I wanted to do and usually buy all the so-called luxuries (essentials to many) if I so desired them. That to me is more the divide between rich and poor - that so many are limited as to what they can and can't do. I did mix with some of those regarded as rich - usually yacht-owners - and I doubt they were any happier than others. Often it just allowed them to have a lover out of sight of their wives.

So, the rich and poor, being more about what one can and can't do in any particular society. And given that, many are richer for being in the much more free and equal ones than purely down to wealth.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words. I've seen too many people in life who call themselves "poor" when in fact they have a decent car, a roof over their heads, bills paid and enough food to sustain them and their family. I would hardly call them poor, more like middle class and whiny.

On the flip side, I don't know if or just don't consider myself "rich". I have everything I need taken care of. I have tons in savings. And I can get nearly anything I want without breaking out the black magic for that. I would suppose I am wealthy.

For me, rich is the ability to pay debts and poor is the inability to pay debts regardless of income.

 

[Brickjectivity]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words.

I propose measuring in terms of people. Money affects this directly, so it is also a measure of your wealth. If you have money then people want to help you, want to be friends, like to visit. There are a couple of reasons.

Fear: If you have less money then people with more money reticent to deal with you. They are afraid you will ask for money or that you will need help in some way. Sometimes they'll give you gifts to keep you managed or test you in ways to see if you can be trusted. They're also afraid you will scam them or will in some way be out to get from them. For this reason people stratify according to how much wealth. There are tiers of wealth. There is not a pecking order so much as a perception of one, but there is a fear order top -> down. The wealthier you are the more welcome you are in wealthy places. Also it makes poorer people pay attention to you. This attention may sometimes be welcome, but it is also creepy.

If you have wealth friends and family are drawn to you. They are often unaware of this, but they avoid poor relatives and poor friends. On top of that there are people you can employ and services you can pay for plus entertainments.

There are other ways to draw people to you. You may have skills. Maybe you are very smart, famous or in some other way charismatic. You might have lots of children and grandchildren (but I guarantee they will visit more often if you are wealthy). So rich/poor is directly related to money, but it is people, services and family that are the essence. You might be able to define how rich you are by who you associate with and who is drawn to you.

 

[Kenny]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words. I've seen too many people in life who call themselves "poor" when in fact they have a decent car, a roof over their heads, bills paid and enough food to sustain them and their family. I would hardly call them poor, more like middle class and whiny.

On the flip side, I don't know if or just don't consider myself "rich". I have everything I need taken care of. I have tons in savings. And I can get nearly anything I want without breaking out the black magic for that. I would suppose I am wealthy.

I personally don't define "rich and poor" in context of just monetary and material possessions. For forty years we have lived in a 1350 sq. ft home starting with human classification of "poor" and yet we considered ourselves and have consider ourselves very rich.

Rich is complete wholeness spirit, soul and body. Monetarily rich would be have enough to live on and a little more to put in store.

There are very monetarily rich people who are on their 3rd marriage and their children are a mess. I would call them poor though monetarily rich.

 

[Yerda]

For a start:

Poverty threshold - Wikipedia

 

[amorphous_constellation]

What I am looking for are working definitions, hopefully, in your own words. I've seen too many people in life who call themselves "poor" when in fact they have a decent car, a roof over their heads, bills paid and enough food to sustain them and their family. I would hardly call them poor, more like middle class and whiny.

On the flip side, I don't know if or just don't consider myself "rich". I have everything I need taken care of. I have tons in savings. And I can get nearly anything I want without breaking out the black magic for that. I would suppose I am wealthy.

Well I think maybe those definitions are somewhat archaic in a way. Nowadays, I think that the terms that are more apt would have to pinpoint the individual's economic security. Are they economically secure or insecure, right now? Like for example, I have followed youtube channels of people that live their car, to eventually save for a house. On the other hand, how does that person's life compare to a renter, who has the mindset that they are stuck doing it?

Another example: I work 3rd shift as a material handler / forklift driver, and I make a little over 40k. Next year I can get 3 weeks vacation finally. Ok think about that it terms of economic security. I don't mind doing my gritty, somewhat militaristic job. I am fully inured to that. That doesn't make me poor: it is the job security problem, which is a far sneakier and more insidious problem, that the archaic terms of 'rich' and 'poor' don't fully encompass.

On a broader level think about all of the options you wrote about it the op, that the typical individual is supposed to have. What I mean, is that having the 'basic' needs taken care of is, in a sense, a rather narrow and short-reaching objective for the individual. You not did mention the goals of the nation, or major self-actualization goals that an individual might achieve, or anything all that transformative. Just some things about someone (who perhaps struggles at times) who merely remain sated, in a very basic way.

I guess I wrote the above paragraph, because that is part of it as well. Where do you put self-actualization on your scale of 'rich' and 'poor.' Because even if never get laid off again, I think maybe being a serious artist is kind of out of my reach at this point. For example, at one point I could play shred guitar, and now I'm at risk of wrecking my hands. So there is another complication there, obviously. I think a richer me would be more self-actualized, without sacrificing stability