Yeah, millionaire status is rapidly becoming meaningless. Lots of people who have a mortgage will probably be millionaires when they pay it off, but they can’t buy anything for it because they still need a roof over their head.
I think 10 million now is the million of the past. Call it inflation. It’s entirely driven by ridiculous housing prices (which are mysteriously not counted in inflation figures).
I am old enough to remember when a simple savings account at the bank was 5% interest, no minimum balance. Now grabbing a high yield account of 3.5% is doing well for the average person, and requires a high balance to qualify for that “incredible” rate.
Housing was affordable and wages hadn’t fully flatlined, so a single income family could still possibly pay that mortgage, even pay extra against the rate, and support a family. Definitely a lot more than one single rate number, lots of things are broken.
Owning a house doesn’t protect you at all. Every decade or so there’s a real estate bubble that pops, you lose all your equity, and you have to start over.
Also try not paying your taxes, or your HOA, and you’ll quickly find out that you don’t really own your home, you’re still paying someone to keep it, or the court will forcibly remove you. And if a squatter moves in, they can stay, and you’re paying for the right for them to stay there.
I consider it a place to live that compared to everything gets cheaper every year. By the time my mortgage is paid off all I have to pay is maintenance and property taxes. Which are a fraction of rent. If we assume things stay proportional, rent for a similar property per month is around $1,200. My property taxes are $2,800. Double that for a yearly average maintenance cost. That’s 466 a month. You can’t even get a used sedan for that much a month let alone a place to live
Also in 0 states can a squatter move in to an owner occupied home and claim squatters rights. Only an issue if the property is vacant
I was shocked to learn that the average homeowner in the US lives in their house for only 7 years. I think it’s due to the nature of how huge the country is and that something as simple as a job change means you have to move across the country and sell your house. There’s also the culture of always upgrading.
I grew up in a place where you usually buy once and live there forever, so equity isn’t really too important. But then again it’s a more centralized way of living where you can stay in place for most of your life.
I was shocked to learn that the average homeowner in the US lives in their house for only 7 years.
I wonder how much of this is a question of what average is being used. It’s the old median vs mean problem.
Elon Musk and a hundred homeless people are in a room. By the mean, the average person in that room is a billionaire. By the median, the average person is homeless.
I’m really curious whether that 7 year average figure is based on the median or mean. Because I could see it being really skewed by young people in their twenties that move around a lot.
I bought land with this mentality. Permanently reducing my costs and investing in off-grid infrastructure to make retirement cheaper.
I think it’s also the culture of seeing real estate as an investment. People buy houses planning on selling after they’ve lived there. I personally don’t think I can tolerate the risk of using equity as leverage for paid off land, because then there’s a risk the bank will take it. I’d rather leverage things I can live without if the bank takes it for whatever reason.
Seriously. My partner and I are millionaires. We’re almost 40 and have a net worth just shy of $2M. We’ve a couple of DINKS. We’re both engineers, are pretty good with numbers, and understand compound interest. We got on the property ladder pretty early. I bought my first townhouse in 2012 pretty much right at the bottom of the housing market. We’ve moved twice since then and have benefited from the full rise in house prices.
Our net worth is a little under $2M. About $10k of that is checking and savings. Another $80k in a taxable brokerage account as an emergency fund. $450k in home equity. The rest is in retirement accounts such as 401ks and IRAs.
We are working class. The closest either of us have ever come to hiring someone is when we’ve hired a plumber or electrician to fix something at our home. I’ve technically owned a business, but just for my own freelance tutoring work. And the closest either of us have ever come to being a landlord was when I had a couple of roommates at that first townhouse I bought.
We’re doing very well; we have no complaints. And while we’ve achieved some modest amount of wealth, it’s not ultimately about living large or in luxury. We live well below our means. We recently bought our first new car in many years, a new Toyota Corolla. It replaced a 15 year old Corolla that my partner bought new. We buy affordable reliable vehicles and drive them til the wheels fall off. I still get most of my clothes at thrift stores. We have a house worth over $600k, but our mortgage payment is just $2k, and that’s on a 15-year note. A few years ago when I was in grad school, I was literally a millionaire who road the bus.
But again, we’re not trying to get rich for the sake of getting rich. We don’t want to own some huge company and lord over a room full of workers. We’re not trying to hoard the largest possible amount of money we can. We don’t view wealth as a lifetime high score. It’s simply a means to achieve stability and safety. We’re on the path to early retirement. We hope to retire by the time we’re 50. We need to save up a couple of million not because we want to live in luxury, but simply because it’s the only way to have a decent stable and safe retirement in this capitalist hellscape we live in. In a world with universal healthcare and a universal basic income, we would have no need for millions in retirement savings. If my partner and I each brought in say, $20k a year from UBI? If we had a paid off house and also didn’t have to worry about healthcare? We could live quite well off just that $40k per year.
I’m a millionaire and I support much higher taxes on millionaires. I do this because ultimately the point for us for having a couple of million is not to have a couple of million. The point is to have safety and stability in our lives. And the more secure the social safety net, the less the need to cover those needs privately.
You may not be rich by the common understand of the term and life style but you are not working class, you are part of the middle class unlike many Americans who say they are. It is a petit bourgeois class. If you have a net worth of almost 2 million dollars you own capital assets and by definition are not part of the working class.
Petit bourgeois? Our money is all in our house and in retirement assets that are just America’s poor excuse for a pension system. If we’re petit bourgeois, so is every retired school teacher that’s worked long enough to earn a pension.
Petit bourgeois refers to people that have to work but also control their own means of production. Classically this meant artisans, tradesmen, shop owners, etc. People who aren’t having their labor exploited, but also still have to work.
In our careers, we’ve almost always worked regular salary jobs. We’re not immune to job loss. We do not own the means of production. We’ve had our labor surplus siphoned off by employers our whole careers.
That’s the whole point of this discussion. Even most millionaires are just working class people trying to achieve a little bit of stability in their lives.
Owning the means of production is the capitalist and bourgeois class of which you are below and do the functional work for, the petit bourgeois are professionals like yourself. .8% of the world has a net worth over a million dollars and only around 2.5% of Americans have over a million in retirement accounts. You are quite literally in the global 1%
Yeah, and none of them are in the working class. That wealth represents a direct transfer of wealth from where I live to the imperial core. You are all liberal petty bourgeois and you are not going to be allies in the revolution, you are going to side with your capitalists when you realize that breaking that transfer is going to be against your material interests.
You can have whatever definition you want. But for me, working class means just that - a person that has earned their bread through the work of their own hands, not through the exploitation of the labor of others, through rent-seeking, or from inheritance.
I’m sure you can cite plenty of theory, but frankly, I don’t care. I prefer a definition of the term centered in lived experience. If you go off raw wealth, you just end up classifying entire nations as working class or bourgeois, at which point the term loses all meaning.
Ok, except your wealth comes from a transfer of wealth from the labor and resources from where I live. Your wealth is based on the super exploitation of the rest of the world. You are enemies of the global working class and you’re not going to ever be revolutionary or do anything to change where you live because your material conditions are dependent on your empires continued exploitation of the rest of the world. At best people who live in the imperial core will use labor organization to secure themselves better welfare under the system you live in, you’re incapable of changing it because you are the perpetrators of it and your material conditions are dependent on it. This is why Americans are useless babies and why you live in a country that is run by someone like Donald Trump, he perfectly represents you. This is why “tankies” support literally any country that fights you, because you are the actual global villains in your banal servitude to the empire.
Oh, you’re just a racist garbage person. Xenophobia does not become OK simply because the target are Americans.
Well, if I guess if I’m irredeemably evil simply because of where I happened to be born, then you have no room to complain. I’m just doing what I was born to do, apparently. I’ll disregard your words, because they’re irrelevant to an evil monster like myself.
Boohoo the multi-millionaire equity holding property owner in the country that is murdering little girls in the country I come from and threatening to invade the country I live in thinks I’m xenophobic, oh noooooo.
All your wealth was stolen and you’re part of an imperial machine that is no different than the Nazis. I already know you’re racist garbage person, because you are American. You’re not working class, you are exploiting the working classes wealth and hording it in your retirement account. If there was a revolution, you would turn your back on it as soon as the empire gave you more crumbs. You’d drop the rest of the world in a second when they dangle medicare for all there. Racist loser Americans have done that every. single. time.
The burden isn’t on me to accept you richy rich, the burden is on you to actually do something about the shithole you live in.
You are saying that capitalists own the means of production, while “little capitalists” don’t.
I don’t think its useful to lump in high-income professional work with the low end of capital accumulation. The sums may overlap, but the actual class interests don’t, at least not entirely. Good analysis should recognize the distinctions here.
The PMC is part of the petit bourgeois in modern society. White Americans are for the most part not part of the working class or global proliteriat since their material conditions are based on the exploitation of the labor from where I live. Read Settlers
With 3 million dollars in liquid assets (ie: not a house), you can bring in about $120k from the safest of investments. Just a high yield savings account. Fully insured.
With an index fund, you can bring in $300k.
That’s enough to live on, given how many people live on that much or less from their job.
So some millionaires may work, but they’re not really the same.
But most “millionaires” are paper millionaires — they have a house and a car and a retirement fund and an emergency fund. Upper-middle-class, for sure, but they’re still working or retired from a lifetime of working.
And yet ultimately that’s what every retirement and disability system of any kind has to be based on. Whether you’re talking traditional methods of just letting your old or sick relatives live with you, state-run pension systems or disability, or private retirement accounts and disability insurance, it’s all ultimately the same deal. The systems vary extremely in their effectiveness and equity. But ultimately there’s no getting around the unavoidable truth. If you want to live in a world where the elderly and disabled are simply not abandoned to die, some of the labor of the young and healthy will be siphoned off to support the old and infirm.
If you want to live in a world where you yourself will not be cast out onto the street to die when you are too old to work, then for some of your later years you will depend on the labor of others, just as you did when you were a child.
And yet ultimately that’s what every retirement and disability system of any kind has to be based on.
There’s a fundamental distinction to be made to the below point of yours:
If you want to live in a world where you yourself will not be cast out onto the street to die when you are too old to work, then for some of your later years you will depend on the labor of others, just as you did when you were a child.
I strongly disagree with your first point, but maybe you misunderstood me. Investment returns are basically letting other people work for your profits, with nothing given in return. I.e. a form of wage theft (or other shenanigans like messing up the environment for profits or exploiting resources or funding a totalitarian regime).
Your second point - while correct - has nothing to do with my criticism of (stock / fund) investment returns: That could be (and was for a few decades, at least in Germany) a generational contract, where society manages to pay out pensions from which elderly / retired people can afford living & care from the GDP. Those pay-outs have been paid in advance by those needing them because they funded the old and retired people at the time they were still in work.
For that system, you do not need any kind of finance products. Of course that doesn’t keep our corrupt governments from spending our retirement money elsewhere and investing in shady funds for private profits and shitty retirement payments. So in today’s world, in practice, yes, people rely on finance product returns for their retirement savings and most of us have no choice in that. But it wasn’t always like that, and it should not be, because it’s a pyramid scheme.
As the other said, it’s not per person. Wealthfront and betterment insure up to like 500k, because they put the money in several banks. Vanguard probably has a similar thing.
I learned recently that FinTech companies like Wealthfront actually aren’t FDIC insured but like to claim they are because the banks they use behind the scenes are.
But there was one case where a similar FinTech company went belly up for whatever reason and their platform closed down, and customers couldn’t claim back their savings because apparently all the money from everyone was pooled into a single (or a couple) of accounts on each of the backend banks, and the banks had no idea how much was owned by who. I moved most of my money out of my Wealthfront HYSA after learning about that.
It’s technically true (“insured via”) but customers get into a false sense of security. We don’t know how they manage the money in their partner banks behind the scenes. If they operate like Yotta (in the linked article) did, then good luck getting your money back if Wealthfront suddenly closes. And the worst part is you can’t claim insurance with Wealthfront because they aren’t actually insured (the partner banks are) and they don’t actually have any of your money.
Of course I’m not claiming Wealthfront has the same setup. But I’d rather just deal directly with an FDIC-insured bank than have that uncertainty. Besides, Wealthfront’s rates aren’t any better than other banks right now anyway.
Yup. 3 million and my husband would not work at all. hed handle whatever he wanted and I’d work from home as I do now, maybe a less stressful job. A lot would be donated and given away to those in need.
Millionaires are working class. $1B - $1M is ~$1B.
Can’t even buy a house for $1m where I live. So not rich.
Yeah, millionaire status is rapidly becoming meaningless. Lots of people who have a mortgage will probably be millionaires when they pay it off, but they can’t buy anything for it because they still need a roof over their head.
I think 10 million now is the million of the past. Call it inflation. It’s entirely driven by ridiculous housing prices (which are mysteriously not counted in inflation figures).
Put 5 randos in a room and one is a millionaire on paper.
It means nothing to be a millionaire if you include house car etc.
You can’t “spend” those items.
can with a heloc, but that’s just me being pedantic
I am old enough to remember when a simple savings account at the bank was 5% interest, no minimum balance. Now grabbing a high yield account of 3.5% is doing well for the average person, and requires a high balance to qualify for that “incredible” rate.
Yes but a mortgage was 11%.
Now housing was still affordable then, so…
Housing was affordable and wages hadn’t fully flatlined, so a single income family could still possibly pay that mortgage, even pay extra against the rate, and support a family. Definitely a lot more than one single rate number, lots of things are broken.
I would absolutely take the interest rates of the 1980s with the housing prices of the 1980s.
Decamillionair
Owning a house doesn’t protect you at all. Every decade or so there’s a real estate bubble that pops, you lose all your equity, and you have to start over.
Also try not paying your taxes, or your HOA, and you’ll quickly find out that you don’t really own your home, you’re still paying someone to keep it, or the court will forcibly remove you. And if a squatter moves in, they can stay, and you’re paying for the right for them to stay there.
That’s if you consider a house a store of wealth.
I consider it a place to live that compared to everything gets cheaper every year. By the time my mortgage is paid off all I have to pay is maintenance and property taxes. Which are a fraction of rent. If we assume things stay proportional, rent for a similar property per month is around $1,200. My property taxes are $2,800. Double that for a yearly average maintenance cost. That’s 466 a month. You can’t even get a used sedan for that much a month let alone a place to live
Also in 0 states can a squatter move in to an owner occupied home and claim squatters rights. Only an issue if the property is vacant
I was shocked to learn that the average homeowner in the US lives in their house for only 7 years. I think it’s due to the nature of how huge the country is and that something as simple as a job change means you have to move across the country and sell your house. There’s also the culture of always upgrading.
I grew up in a place where you usually buy once and live there forever, so equity isn’t really too important. But then again it’s a more centralized way of living where you can stay in place for most of your life.
I wonder how much of this is a question of what average is being used. It’s the old median vs mean problem.
Elon Musk and a hundred homeless people are in a room. By the mean, the average person in that room is a billionaire. By the median, the average person is homeless.
I’m really curious whether that 7 year average figure is based on the median or mean. Because I could see it being really skewed by young people in their twenties that move around a lot.
Those people tend to rent and not own though.
Sure. But I think the seven year figure is how often people “on average” move, not just how often people sell and buy new homes.
I bought land with this mentality. Permanently reducing my costs and investing in off-grid infrastructure to make retirement cheaper.
I think it’s also the culture of seeing real estate as an investment. People buy houses planning on selling after they’ve lived there. I personally don’t think I can tolerate the risk of using equity as leverage for paid off land, because then there’s a risk the bank will take it. I’d rather leverage things I can live without if the bank takes it for whatever reason.
As with all things finance, depends on where. $1m in San Francisco means you can’t afford a home. $1m in Sicily is a great life.
Canada?
Seriously. My partner and I are millionaires. We’re almost 40 and have a net worth just shy of $2M. We’ve a couple of DINKS. We’re both engineers, are pretty good with numbers, and understand compound interest. We got on the property ladder pretty early. I bought my first townhouse in 2012 pretty much right at the bottom of the housing market. We’ve moved twice since then and have benefited from the full rise in house prices.
Our net worth is a little under $2M. About $10k of that is checking and savings. Another $80k in a taxable brokerage account as an emergency fund. $450k in home equity. The rest is in retirement accounts such as 401ks and IRAs.
We are working class. The closest either of us have ever come to hiring someone is when we’ve hired a plumber or electrician to fix something at our home. I’ve technically owned a business, but just for my own freelance tutoring work. And the closest either of us have ever come to being a landlord was when I had a couple of roommates at that first townhouse I bought.
We’re doing very well; we have no complaints. And while we’ve achieved some modest amount of wealth, it’s not ultimately about living large or in luxury. We live well below our means. We recently bought our first new car in many years, a new Toyota Corolla. It replaced a 15 year old Corolla that my partner bought new. We buy affordable reliable vehicles and drive them til the wheels fall off. I still get most of my clothes at thrift stores. We have a house worth over $600k, but our mortgage payment is just $2k, and that’s on a 15-year note. A few years ago when I was in grad school, I was literally a millionaire who road the bus.
But again, we’re not trying to get rich for the sake of getting rich. We don’t want to own some huge company and lord over a room full of workers. We’re not trying to hoard the largest possible amount of money we can. We don’t view wealth as a lifetime high score. It’s simply a means to achieve stability and safety. We’re on the path to early retirement. We hope to retire by the time we’re 50. We need to save up a couple of million not because we want to live in luxury, but simply because it’s the only way to have a decent stable and safe retirement in this capitalist hellscape we live in. In a world with universal healthcare and a universal basic income, we would have no need for millions in retirement savings. If my partner and I each brought in say, $20k a year from UBI? If we had a paid off house and also didn’t have to worry about healthcare? We could live quite well off just that $40k per year.
I’m a millionaire and I support much higher taxes on millionaires. I do this because ultimately the point for us for having a couple of million is not to have a couple of million. The point is to have safety and stability in our lives. And the more secure the social safety net, the less the need to cover those needs privately.
You may not be rich by the common understand of the term and life style but you are not working class, you are part of the middle class unlike many Americans who say they are. It is a petit bourgeois class. If you have a net worth of almost 2 million dollars you own capital assets and by definition are not part of the working class.
Petit bourgeois? Our money is all in our house and in retirement assets that are just America’s poor excuse for a pension system. If we’re petit bourgeois, so is every retired school teacher that’s worked long enough to earn a pension.
Petit bourgeois refers to people that have to work but also control their own means of production. Classically this meant artisans, tradesmen, shop owners, etc. People who aren’t having their labor exploited, but also still have to work.
In our careers, we’ve almost always worked regular salary jobs. We’re not immune to job loss. We do not own the means of production. We’ve had our labor surplus siphoned off by employers our whole careers.
That’s the whole point of this discussion. Even most millionaires are just working class people trying to achieve a little bit of stability in their lives.
Owning the means of production is the capitalist and bourgeois class of which you are below and do the functional work for, the petit bourgeois are professionals like yourself. .8% of the world has a net worth over a million dollars and only around 2.5% of Americans have over a million in retirement accounts. You are quite literally in the global 1%
That’s true for a lot of people in “first world” countries. One is ahead of billions of poor people basically for existing.
FYI, this person told me to kill myself because I said they don’t handle criticism well and tell people to kill themselves.
I can’t report it because I’m banned in the community for saying China isn’t perfect.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/73259654/27442305
Yeah, and none of them are in the working class. That wealth represents a direct transfer of wealth from where I live to the imperial core. You are all liberal petty bourgeois and you are not going to be allies in the revolution, you are going to side with your capitalists when you realize that breaking that transfer is going to be against your material interests.
You can have whatever definition you want. But for me, working class means just that - a person that has earned their bread through the work of their own hands, not through the exploitation of the labor of others, through rent-seeking, or from inheritance.
I’m sure you can cite plenty of theory, but frankly, I don’t care. I prefer a definition of the term centered in lived experience. If you go off raw wealth, you just end up classifying entire nations as working class or bourgeois, at which point the term loses all meaning.
Ok, except your wealth comes from a transfer of wealth from the labor and resources from where I live. Your wealth is based on the super exploitation of the rest of the world. You are enemies of the global working class and you’re not going to ever be revolutionary or do anything to change where you live because your material conditions are dependent on your empires continued exploitation of the rest of the world. At best people who live in the imperial core will use labor organization to secure themselves better welfare under the system you live in, you’re incapable of changing it because you are the perpetrators of it and your material conditions are dependent on it. This is why Americans are useless babies and why you live in a country that is run by someone like Donald Trump, he perfectly represents you. This is why “tankies” support literally any country that fights you, because you are the actual global villains in your banal servitude to the empire.
Oh, you’re just a racist garbage person. Xenophobia does not become OK simply because the target are Americans.
Well, if I guess if I’m irredeemably evil simply because of where I happened to be born, then you have no room to complain. I’m just doing what I was born to do, apparently. I’ll disregard your words, because they’re irrelevant to an evil monster like myself.
FYI, this person told me to kill myself because I said they don’t handle criticism well and tell people to kill themselves.
I can’t report it because I’m banned in the community for saying China isn’t perfect.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/73259654/27442305
Boohoo the multi-millionaire equity holding property owner in the country that is murdering little girls in the country I come from and threatening to invade the country I live in thinks I’m xenophobic, oh noooooo.
All your wealth was stolen and you’re part of an imperial machine that is no different than the Nazis. I already know you’re racist garbage person, because you are American. You’re not working class, you are exploiting the working classes wealth and hording it in your retirement account. If there was a revolution, you would turn your back on it as soon as the empire gave you more crumbs. You’d drop the rest of the world in a second when they dangle medicare for all there. Racist loser Americans have done that every. single. time.
The burden isn’t on me to accept you richy rich, the burden is on you to actually do something about the shithole you live in.
You are saying that capitalists own the means of production, while “little capitalists” don’t.
I don’t think its useful to lump in high-income professional work with the low end of capital accumulation. The sums may overlap, but the actual class interests don’t, at least not entirely. Good analysis should recognize the distinctions here.
I think you’re thinking of the professional managerial class.
The PMC is part of the petit bourgeois in modern society. White Americans are for the most part not part of the working class or global proliteriat since their material conditions are based on the exploitation of the labor from where I live. Read Settlers
With 3 million dollars in liquid assets (ie: not a house), you can bring in about $120k from the safest of investments. Just a high yield savings account. Fully insured.
With an index fund, you can bring in $300k.
That’s enough to live on, given how many people live on that much or less from their job.
So some millionaires may work, but they’re not really the same.
But most “millionaires” are paper millionaires — they have a house and a car and a retirement fund and an emergency fund. Upper-middle-class, for sure, but they’re still working or retired from a lifetime of working.
That’s why I specified liquid, not-a-house, money.
Investment returns are by definition the fruits of other people’s labor.
And yet ultimately that’s what every retirement and disability system of any kind has to be based on. Whether you’re talking traditional methods of just letting your old or sick relatives live with you, state-run pension systems or disability, or private retirement accounts and disability insurance, it’s all ultimately the same deal. The systems vary extremely in their effectiveness and equity. But ultimately there’s no getting around the unavoidable truth. If you want to live in a world where the elderly and disabled are simply not abandoned to die, some of the labor of the young and healthy will be siphoned off to support the old and infirm.
If you want to live in a world where you yourself will not be cast out onto the street to die when you are too old to work, then for some of your later years you will depend on the labor of others, just as you did when you were a child.
There’s a fundamental distinction to be made to the below point of yours:
I strongly disagree with your first point, but maybe you misunderstood me. Investment returns are basically letting other people work for your profits, with nothing given in return. I.e. a form of wage theft (or other shenanigans like messing up the environment for profits or exploiting resources or funding a totalitarian regime).
Your second point - while correct - has nothing to do with my criticism of (stock / fund) investment returns: That could be (and was for a few decades, at least in Germany) a generational contract, where society manages to pay out pensions from which elderly / retired people can afford living & care from the GDP. Those pay-outs have been paid in advance by those needing them because they funded the old and retired people at the time they were still in work.
For that system, you do not need any kind of finance products. Of course that doesn’t keep our corrupt governments from spending our retirement money elsewhere and investing in shady funds for private profits and shitty retirement payments. So in today’s world, in practice, yes, people rely on finance product returns for their retirement savings and most of us have no choice in that. But it wasn’t always like that, and it should not be, because it’s a pyramid scheme.
That’s just retirement
I thought FDIC insurance capped at 250k/person
It’s per person per bank (or similar), so you can split deposits across multiple banks and stay FDIC insured over $250k.
As the other said, it’s not per person. Wealthfront and betterment insure up to like 500k, because they put the money in several banks. Vanguard probably has a similar thing.
I learned recently that FinTech companies like Wealthfront actually aren’t FDIC insured but like to claim they are because the banks they use behind the scenes are.
But there was one case where a similar FinTech company went belly up for whatever reason and their platform closed down, and customers couldn’t claim back their savings because apparently all the money from everyone was pooled into a single (or a couple) of accounts on each of the backend banks, and the banks had no idea how much was owned by who. I moved most of my money out of my Wealthfront HYSA after learning about that.
To see if your financial institution is directly insured, you can check here: https://banks.data.fdic.gov/bankfind-suite/bank
EDIT: Found an article: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/02/synapse-fintech-fdic-false-promise.html
Well that’s concerning. They say it’s all insured via the partner banks ( https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/wealthfront-fdic-insurance/ ) but you can just put anything on a website.
It’s technically true (“insured via”) but customers get into a false sense of security. We don’t know how they manage the money in their partner banks behind the scenes. If they operate like Yotta (in the linked article) did, then good luck getting your money back if Wealthfront suddenly closes. And the worst part is you can’t claim insurance with Wealthfront because they aren’t actually insured (the partner banks are) and they don’t actually have any of your money.
Of course I’m not claiming Wealthfront has the same setup. But I’d rather just deal directly with an FDIC-insured bank than have that uncertainty. Besides, Wealthfront’s rates aren’t any better than other banks right now anyway.
Yup. 3 million and my husband would not work at all. hed handle whatever he wanted and I’d work from home as I do now, maybe a less stressful job. A lot would be donated and given away to those in need.
For the vast majority of millionaires, their wealth is mostly home equity, not liquid funds.
$1M ≈ 2 average single family homes
$1B ≈ 2000 average single family homes