logo
Who wants to be a millionaire? 1 in 10 Americans already is but the status loses its luster

Who wants to be a millionaire? 1 in 10 Americans already is but the status loses its luster

Independent5 days ago
As a child, Heidi Barley watched her family pay for groceries with food stamps. As a college student, she dropped out because she couldn't afford tuition. In her twenties, already scraping by, she was forced to take a pay cut that shrunk her salary to just $34,000 a year.
But this summer, the 41-year-old hit a milestone that long felt out of reach: She became a millionaire.
A surging number of everyday Americans now boast a seven-figure net worth once the domain of celebrities and CEOs. But as the ranks of millionaires grow fatter, the significance of the status is shifting alongside perceptions of what it takes to be truly rich.
' Millionaire used to sound like Rich Uncle Pennybags in a top hat,' says Michael Ashley Schulman, chief investment officer at Running Point Capital Advisors, a wealth management firm in El Segundo, California. 'It's no longer a backstage pass to palatial estates and caviar bumps. It's the new mass-affluent middleweight class, financially secure but two zeros short of private-jet territory.'
Inflation, ballooning home values and a decades-long push into stock markets by average investors have lifted millions into millionairehood. A June report from Swiss bank UBS found about one-tenth of American adults are members of the seven-digit club, with 1,000 freshly minted millionaires added daily last year.
Thirty years ago, the IRS counted 1.6 million Americans with a net worth of $1 million or more. UBS — using data from the United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and central banks of countries around the globe — put the number at 23.8 million in the U.S. last year, a nearly 15-fold increase.
The expanding ranks of millionaires come as the gulf between rich and poor widens. The richest 10% of Americans hold two-thirds of household wealth, according to the Federal Reserve, averaging $8.1 million each. The bottom 50% hold 3% of wealth, with an average of just $60,000 to their names.
Federal Reserve data also shows there are differences by race. Asian people outpace white people in the U.S. in median wealth, while Black and Hispanic people trail in their net worth.
Barley was working as a journalist when her newspaper ended its pension program and she got a lump-sum payout of about $5,000. A colleague convinced her to invest it in a retirement account, and ever since, she's stashed away whatever she could. The investments dipped at first during the Great Recession but eventually started growing. In time, she came to find catharsis in amassing savings, going home and checking her account balances when she had a tough day at work.
Last month, after one such day, she realized the moment had come.
'Did you know that we're millionaires?' she asked her husband.
'Good job, honey,' Barley says he replied, unfazed.
It brought no immediate change. Like many millionaires, much of her wealth is in long-term investments and her home, not easy-to-access cash. She still lives in her modest Orlando, Florida, house, socks away half her paycheck, fills the napkin holder with takeout napkins and lines trash cans with grocery bags.
Still, Barley says it feels powerful to cross a threshold she never imagined reaching as a child.
'But it's not as glamorous as the ideas in your head,' she says.
All wealth is relative. To thousandaires, $1 million is the stuff of dreams. To billionaires, it's a rounding error. Either way, it takes twice as much cash today to match the buying power of 30 years ago.
A net worth of $1 million in 1995 is equivalent to about $2.1 million today, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A seven-figure net worth is, to some, as outdated a yardstick as a six-figure salary. Nonetheless, 'millionaire' is peppered in everything from politics to popular music as shorthand for rich.
'It's a nice round number but it's a point in a longer journey,' says Dan Uden, a 41-year-old from Providence, Rhode Island, who works in information technology and who hit the million-dollar mark last month. 'It definitely gives you some room to breathe.'
No other country comes close to the U.S. in the sheer number of millionaires, though relative to population, UBS found Switzerland and Luxembourg had higher rates.
Kenneth Carow, a finance professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, says commonalities emerge among today's millionaires. The vast majority own stocks and a home. Most live below their means. They value education and teach financial responsibility to their children.
'The dream of becoming a millionaire,' Carow says, 'has become more obtainable.'
Jim Wang, 45, a software engineer-turned finance blogger from Fulton, Maryland, says even if hitting $1 million was essentially 'a non-event' for him and his wife, it still held weight for him as the son of immigrants who saved money by turning the heat off on winter nights.
The private jets he envisioned as a kid may not have materialized at the million-dollar threshold, but he still sees it as a marker that brings a certain level of security.
'It's possible, even with a regular job,' he says. 'You just have to be diligent and consistent.'
The resilience of financial markets and the ease of investing in broad-based, low-fee index funds has fueled the balances of many millionaires who don't earn massive salaries or inherit family fortunes.
Among them is a burgeoning community of younger millionaires born out of the movement known as FIRE, for Financial Independence Retire Early.
Jason Breck, 48, of Fishers, Indiana, embraced FIRE and reached the million-dollar mark nine years ago. He promptly quit his job in automotive marketing, where he generally earned around $60,000 a year but managed to stow away around 70% of his pay.
Now, Breck and his wife spend several months a year traveling. Despite being retired, they continue to grow their balance by sticking to a tight budget and keeping expenses to $1,500 a month when they're in the U.S and a few hundred dollars more when they travel.
Hitting their goal hasn't translated to luxury. There is no lawn crew to cut the grass, no Netflix or Amazon Prime, no Uber Eats. They fly economy. They drive a 2005 Toyota.
'It's not a golden ticket like it was in the past,' Breck says. 'For us, a million dollars buys us freedom and peace of mind. We're not yacht rich, but for us, we're time rich.'
___
Matt Sedensky can be reached at msedensky@ap.org and https://x.com/sedensky
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

AstraZeneca's falling out with Britain
AstraZeneca's falling out with Britain

Economist

time7 hours ago

  • Economist

AstraZeneca's falling out with Britain

Illustration: Klaus Kremmerz I N A COUNTRY struggling to find reasons for cheer, British life sciences offer a ray of hope. The £108bn ($145bn) industry employs more than 300,000 people, many in high-value jobs, and Britain is a genuine global power. No wonder ministers like to boast about it. Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, has said it could be 'the rocket fuel for our stagnant economy'. Victory in the European Championship is a rare moment of national joy But the men seem to benefit more Torness is closing in on its 40th birthday No. But that might not be the point Despite signs of American misgivings A mighty rise in electricity costs has complicated the drive for clean power

Despite Trump, the US economy remains surprisingly resilient. But for how long?
Despite Trump, the US economy remains surprisingly resilient. But for how long?

The Guardian

time11 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Despite Trump, the US economy remains surprisingly resilient. But for how long?

Chaotic and unpredictable, keeping up with Donald Trump's volatile trade war – never mind his presidency – can be tough. Back in April after his 'Liberation Day' tariff announcement, the talk was of the president crashing the global economy. Then, after a Wall Street backlash, the world learned the acronym 'Taco', which stands for 'Trump Always Chickens Out'. Now, things are heating up again. The president's decision to hit US trading partners with new tariffs – including Canada, Brazil, India and Taiwan – after his self-imposed 1 August deadline certainly reignites a threat to the world economy. Dozens of countries have been left reeling, and US consumers are expected to pay a heavy price. However, there is a sense that things could have been worse. Nowhere more clearly is this reflected than on Wall Street: despite the chaos of the president's trade war, the stock market remains close to record levels. After the latest escalation on Friday, and some worrying US jobs numbers, share prices took a hit, sliding by about 1%. But this is a setback, rather than a rout. A further slide could be ignited by this capricious president. Trump's decision to fire the official in charge of labour market data and his war on the independence of the US Federal Reserve will make matters worse. But despite the warnings of untold economic damage from the US tariff war earlier this year, the American economy has proven surprisingly resilient in recent months. Last week, the president seized on US growth figures showing the economy had expanded at an annualised rate of 3% in the second quarter – far in excess of the 2.4% rate predicted on Wall Street. Could the 'fake news' media have it wrong? Are tariff wars 'good, and easy to win,' as Trump claims? While inflation has ticked up, from 2.4% in May to 2.7% in June, it is well below the peak which followed the height of the pandemic disruption and Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and is far from hitting the levels feared. Back in April, in a country wrought with division, Democrat voters reckoned inflation was on track to hit 7.9% within a year, while Republicans said it would collapse to 0.9%. Butthere is good reason why the US economy has so far defied the prophecies of Armageddon. For starters, the hot-cold nature of Trump's tariff war means investors still anticipate further deals will be done to avoid the worst threats from ever materialising. The toughest tariffs introduced on Friday are only just arriving, too, meaning any impact has yet to emerge. Most countries have not hit back with retaliatory measures, which would have dramatically worsened things by putting international trade into a deeper tailspin. Meanwhile, knowing full well the dangers of this erratic president, businesses have been planning for months to avoid the worst-case scenarios. US companies rushed to stockpile goods before the trade war, helping them to keep prices down for now. Some firms have taken a hit to profits, according to analysts at Deutsche Bank, reckoning this is better than testing struggling American consumers – worn out by years of high inflation – with further price increases. The tariff costs are also being spread by multinationals, by increasing prices across the markets they operate in. In one high-profile example, Sony has put up the price of its PlayStation 5 by as much as 25% in some markets; including the UK, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. But not in the US. Still, there are signs that consequences are coming. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion When US businesses exhaust their pre-tariff stockpiles, it is likely that prices will creep higher. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of an erratic president is hitting jobs and investment. Last week's US jobs market data has reignited fears over the resilience of the American economy. Tariffs are weighing on business confidence and steadily creeping into consumer prices. GDP growth of 3% might appear robust on the face of things, but this figure was heavily influenced by the 0.5% fall in output in the first quarter, when the surge in US firms rushing to beat Trump's tariffs distorted activity. Growth in the first half averaged 1.25%, markedly slower than the 2.8% rate for 2024 as a whole. Part of the reason Wall Street remains sanguine about this is the continued belief that things could have turned out worse. Deals are still expected, with the pause in tariffs for key US trade partners Mexico and China, suggesting this most clearly. The investor view is that, rather than tariffs, the president would prefer a string of box office moments in front of the TV cameras with trade partners paying tribute to the court of Trump. However, it would be wrong to underestimate the self-described 'tariff man's' love of border taxes. And even though his most extreme threats will be negotiated down, the final destination will still be much worse than before. An economic hurricane might be avoided, but a storm is still the last thing businesses and consumers need. Britain's US trade deal is a case in point. A 10% US tariff on British goods has been welcomed as a big victory for Keir Starmer given the alternative, but it is still far worse than before. British cars will face a tariff rate four times higher than previously; costing jobs and growth in Britain while hitting American consumers in the pocket. For the US consumer, the average tariff had been close to 2% before Trump's return to the White House. After his 1 August escalation, that figure leaps to about 15% – the highest level since the 1930s. Almost a century ago a similar wrong-headed protectionist approach in Washington made the Great Depression far worse: the Smoot-Hawley tariffs hit the US and triggered a domino effect among the main industrialised nations; ultimately leading to the second world war. In the unpredictability of Trump's trade war, hope remains that similar mistakes can be avoided. But significant damage is still being done.

Trump is wrong to pick a fight with Powell – but is right about interest rates
Trump is wrong to pick a fight with Powell – but is right about interest rates

Telegraph

time13 hours ago

  • Telegraph

Trump is wrong to pick a fight with Powell – but is right about interest rates

Visiting Scotland last week, Donald Trump used a joint press conference to mock Keir Starmer. He castigated Labour's policies on immigration, energy and much else. The Prime Minister sat awkwardly, sporting his trademark rictus grin. Trump has lately dished out plenty of public humiliation – not least aimed at Jerome Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve. The president has put huge pressure on the Fed to lower interest rates, to boost US growth and ease interest payments on America's massive $36trn (£27.6trn) national debt. This jars badly with the conventional wisdom that central banks should be independent, allowing technocrat economists to set interest rates to bear down on inflation. That's far better for the economy in the long-run, but this precious independence is jeopardised when vote-hungry politicians seek to keep borrowing costs too low. Such independence has become an almost sacred policy concept over the last half century. And no central bank matters more than the Fed, which sets the course for monetary policy across the globe. Yet Trump, astonishingly, has lately called Powell a 'numbskull', a 'stubborn mule' and worse. On a recent Fed visit, he rebuked him over the cost of a refurbishment project – a potential pretext to sack Powell, which may not be legally possible, but which Trump often floats regardless. Between September and December last year, the Fed's committee of twelve rate-setters voted to lower the US benchmark interest rate three times from its post-Covid-peak of 5.25pc-5.5pc, in increments down to 4.25pc-4.5pc. But much to the president's frustration, rates have since stayed put. The Bank of England, meanwhile, has cut rates four times since last summer, including as recently as May, while the European Central Bank has enacted no less than eight eurozone rate reductions over the same period, the latest in June. Having held rates since the start of 2025, the Fed just did so again when governors met last Wednesday (although two Trump-appointees voted against, the biggest intra-Fed rate disagreement in thirty years). Fed policymakers are rightly worried about price pressures, with headline inflation hitting 3.7pc during the year to June, up from 2.4pc the previous month and well above the 2pc target. And Trump's era-defining slew of tariffs – taxes on imports into the US – means we could see a lot more inflation yet. With the President's three-month moratorium expiring this weekend, and tariffs now set to bite on some of America's largest trading partners, the Fed is understandably concerned. Powell insists the US economy is strong enough for the Fed to wait before further rate cuts, as we see if Trump's tariffs really do aggravate inflation. And last week's GDP numbers – a 3pc expansion from April to June – was certainly way above consensus forecasts, reversing a 0.5pc contraction during the first three months of the year, the worst quarterly performance since early 2022. This January to March shrinkage, though, was largely due to the huge rise in US imports as buyers sought to get ahead of Trump's expected tariff onslaught. And since 'liberation day' in April, when the President unveiled his tariffs on the White House lawn, imports into the US have plunged. This artificially boosted April to June GDP growth as the first-quarter trend unwound. Yes, consumer spending rose 1.4pc during the second quarter, outpacing the 0.5pc increase over the previous three months, supporting Powell's argument the economy is coping without further rate cuts. But 'final sales to private domestic purchasers', a key demand metric that the Fed watches closely, grew just 1.2pc over the latest quarter, slower than the 1.9pc increase between January and March. High mortgage rates are also holding back the housing market and related construction, as Trump relentlessly points out, with residential investment down 4.6pc during the second quarter. But that's part of a broader investment slump as business leaders look to see how the president's tariffs play out. For now, the market consensus is that the US economy is showing resilience, but more rate cuts may be justified as long as inflation isn't further provoked. So Trump's attacks on Powell are based on legitimate economic analysis. Yet his language is way over the top. Some say the president is picking headline-grabbing fights with the Fed chair to detract from mounting criticism over his handling of the Epstein files. I suspect he simply wants lower rates and, for now at least, Powell stands in his way. Ironically, it was Trump who appointed Powell in 2017. But having repeatedly called for him to resign, the president seems certain to replace him when Powell's term expires next May. In the meantime, Trump's ceaseless undermining of central bank independence is deeply damaging. Yes, the Fed has a 'dual mandate' to pursue both price stability and full employment, unlike the solely inflation-focussed aims of most other central banks. But while Trump's arguments may be technically valid, it should absolutely not be him making them, nor anyone else near the top of government. Given the tone he has set, though, Powell's successor will be seen as the president's lackey. And with US and global inflation far from tamed, that could end up being a serious problem. My general view is that central bank independence is far more important than any individual central banker. Andrew Bailey, for instance, has shown seriously bad judgement at the Bank of England – endlessly insisting post-Covid inflation would be 'transitory', for instance, while deriding those of us who correctly predicted otherwise. His appointment was a mistake, but he should stay, free from the threat politicians might remove him, until his term expires in March 2028. The same applies to Powell and far more so – he should serve his full term.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store