This reminds me of a conversation I had recently with a Swiss woman from Geneva

While I think the people with $5 million homes on the Lake are rich, I think your friend shows meaningful familiarity with wealth when she draws a higher line for the truly rich than most people do

I made the mistake of referring to someone she knew with a $5 million dollar house near Lac Leman as being “rich”.

The Genevoise turned up her nose at this idea, and suggested that he was nothing but “un petit riche” or “un poseur”. In order to be *vraiment riche* she assured me, you needed a minimum of *at least* $50 to $100 million.

His neighbor considered paying cash for his house, but was able to borrow $4 mill at 6%, and invest it in his business and get a 10% return

I started to object to this (where does that leave the homeless, the unemployed, should they even be allowed to exist?) but I decided there was no point in pursuing the conversation.

I agree with both you and your Genevoise friend. I’ve been amazed at how many people in the U.S., from those with tens of millions of dollars in assets down to much of the middle class, conflate their interests with those of the ultra rich. A more divided society is sometimes a good thing.

Hmmm, I’m afraid you misunderstood my post. I never said this Genevoise was a friend of mine, merely someone I happened to have a brief conversation with, although not nearly brief enough, as far as I’m concerned.

And I was trying to convey her sense of snobbism, entitlement and superiority in referring to someone with a $5 million home as “un petit riche” (a little rich) and “un poseur” (a poser). As if only someone with $50 to $100 million was worthy of her respect.

Personally I find the snobbism of this attitude to be appalling and reprehensible, but it seems rksloans.com/installment-loans-ms/ to be quite common among those who are “truly rich”, as you put it, or merely aspiring to that category, the “posers”, as Richard Cameron refers to them. Continue Reading