There are nine million "millionaire households" in America. That number is up 700,000 from 2004. TNS Financial Services, the group that conducted the survey, defines "millionaire household" as having a net worth of $1 million excluding the value of the subject's primary residence. By this definition, millionaire households rose eight percent this past year and thirty-three percent the previous year. Don't player hate. Player participate. Or, don't bother at all. People aren't companies. The bottom line isn't always the bottom line.

I bet that Sean Flynn fellow is one of them.

Rich B'stardo!

Sean is starting his own line of clothing. Ripped seatpants, lime green of course. Sneakers 9 years old. Cookie monster shirts etc. He expects to make a million just modeling these clothes

He is, a man about town. And one of Beantown's most eligible bartenders and real estate moguls.

The rich get richer and the poor stay the same?

I am a bit confused about this definition of net worth. Does that mean that you can be very much in debt by means of having morttgages* but that if the properties you have morttgages* on have a value over one million (or some combination of value of the properties, and your other assets and income) then you qualify as a millionaire household? That strikes me as a pretty elastic sense of being wealthy.

Reminds me of the old story about the man in the Porsche eating at McDonald's: Does he eat at McD's b/c he owns a Porsche, or does he own a Porsche b/c he eats at McD's?

*(I was forced to spell mort-gage incorrectly above b/c I was told that word signifies "questionable content" . . . that is one hardcore filter you run Flynn if you have to worry about kinky real-estate investors).

It has been written, and I am a true believer, that if you took all of the money in the world and re-distributed it equally among the population, after a period of time, the same people who were proportionally wealthy would be again.

For those who think that one day there will be no such thing as the poor if we institute the right wealth re-distribution programs, I would tell them just to observe the rich getting richer.

Brian,

Net-worth, as I understand it, is the amount of money you'd have after selling everything AND paying off any debt you may have (credit cards, home loans, etc.).

So owning a million dollars worth of stuff does not make you a millionaire if you're in debt for a million dollars. In fact, you'd be broke.

Thanks Ralph, that is what confused me about the concept. Dan's post mentions "excluding the value of the subject's primary residence" which seemed to me to mean, its value *regardless* of what you may still owe on the property. Your understanding must be the correct one though or else the concept of "net worth" wouldn't tell us much at all.

Only vaguely related to the post:

The other day I was talking to a woman who was complaining about "tax cuts for the rich" and how much SHE has to pay in taxes.

It was almost comical. I asked her how much she and her husband make...over $140k per year. She didn't "feel" rich, so, obviously, they're talking about someone else, right?

When I pointed out that her family's income places them in the top 10% of income earners and, therefore, she is a member of that class of "evil rich" she was a bit flabbergasted.

When I further pointed out that, in order to actually "cut" taxes, those cuts, by definition, benefit primarily those who are actually paying taxes...not those who are not.

I know that all of this is info that readers of Mr. Flynn's blog are well aware of, I'm just relating the story because it absolutely amazes me how clueless some people are.

The scary thing is, they still vote and they base their votes upon their ignorance and misunderstanding.

"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so."
-- Henry Wheeler Shaw

817310: Hey, does anyone know where I can find a list of gas stations with low prices in my area?