reading

The Millionaire Next Door
Copyright © 1996 by Thomas J. Stanley and William D. Danko
Preface copyright © 2010 by Thomas J. Stanley
Cover art to the electronic edition copyright © 2010 by RosettaBooks, LLC

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that neither the author nor the publisher is engaged in rendering legal, investment, accounting, or other professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought.

All the names in the case studies contained in this book are pseudonyms.

Electronic edition published 2010 by RosettaBooks LLC, New York.
ISBN e-Pub edition: 9780795314865

For Janet, Sarah, and Brad—a million Christmases,
a trillion Fourth of Julys
—T. J. Stanley

For my loving wife, Connie, and my dear children,
Christy, Todd, and David
—W. D. Danko

Tables

6-1: The Likelihood of Receiving a Substantial Inheritance: Occupational Contrasts

6-2: The Likelihood of Receiving Substantial Financial Gifts: Occupational Contrasts

7-4: Predicted Number of Estates Valued at $1 Million or More Rank Ordered by Number of Estates by State for the Year 2000

PREFACE

A reporter recently asked me about the changes I have noticed among the American millionaire population since the current economic meltdown. She wanted to know if the millionaire market is dead given the recent reversals in the market value of stocks and homes. I replied that the millionaire next door is still alive and kicking even today in this recession. Since 1980 I have consistently found that most millionaires do not have all of their wealth tied up in their stock portfolios or in their homes. One of the reasons that millionaires are economically successful is that they think differently. Many a millionaire has told me that true diversity has much to do with controlling one’s investments; no one can control the stock market. But you can, for example, control your own business, private investments, and money you lend to private parties. Not at any time during the past thirty years have I found that the typical millionaire had more than 30 percent of his wealth invested in publicly traded stocks. More often it is in the low-to-mid-20-percent range. These percentages are consistent with those found in studies conducted by the Internal Revenue Service, which has the best data set on millionaires in the world.

Consider the profile of a millionaire-next-door-type couple, Ms. T and her husband. To most, this couple’s lifestyle is boring, even common. This millionaire’s brand of watch is a Timex; her husband’s is a Seiko (number one among millionaires). The couple buys their clothes at Dillard’s, J.C. Penney, and TJ Maxx. They have purchased only two motor vehicles in the past 10 years: both Fords. The current market value of their home is approximately $275,000. Ms. T’s most recent haircut cost $18. Yet they are uncommon in the sense that they are financially independent.

When I speak of people like Ms. T and her husband, invariably someone will ask: “But are they happy?” Fully 90 percent of millionaires who live in homes valued at under $300,000 are extremely satisfied with life. And, in my most recent work, I state that there are nearly three times as many households with investments of $1 million or more living in homes valued at $300,000 or less than there are living in homes valued at $1 million or more.

Even most multimillionaires in America don’t live in expensive homes. I recently tabulated the 2007 IRS estate data (the latest data available) for those decedents with an estate valued at $3.5 million or more. I estimated that the median market value of a decedent’s home was $469,021, or less than 10 percent of their median net worth. On average these decedents had more than two-and-one-half times more of their wealth invested in investment real estate than in their own personal homes.

Profiling the millionaire next door population was a cumulative process which continues today. Originally I used a different description to define this segment. I first coined the “wealthy blue collar” segment in a paper entitled “Market Segmentation: Utilizing Investment Determinants,” which I presented on October 10, 1979 at a conference of the Securities Industry Association in New York City. The paper was later published by the American Marketing Association. Earlier in May 1979, the New York Stock Exchange had asked me to develop a set of marketing implications and recommendations based upon its then recently completed national survey of 2,741 households on investment patterns and attitudes and behaviors about money. This provided a base for the above-mentioned paper. A key point I made in this paper was:

opportunities exist in segments that the [investment] industry has ignored for years…. [Members of] the really big segment, the wealthy blue collar, do not need to purchase expensive artifacts that are part of the white collar workers’ knapsack….

At the time of my presentation I realized that the blue-collar/millionaire next door segment did exist, and it was likely to be a sizable one. Not long after I first identified this marker, I discovered how very large it indeed was.

In June 1980 I was asked by a large money center bank to conduct a national study of the millionaire population in America. During the planning stage, an event took place which had a major influence upon the direction of my career. I encountered my epiphany about the millionaire-next-door segment one morning at a task force meeting with my client and a colleague and friend, Jon Robbin. Jon is a Harvard-trained mathematician who profiled the wealth characteristics of the residents within each of more than 200,000 neighborhoods across America. He said, in passing, “About one-half of the millionaires in America don’t live in upscale neighborhoods.” That’s when the light went on inside my head! The really compelling story was not the millionaire population in general. Rather it was the low-profile millionaires, the ones who lived in modest homes situated in middle-class, even working-class neighborhoods. From that moment on, I intensely began studying and writing about the millionaire-next-door types. The research that I conducted thirty years ago in 1980 was the first comprehensive national study about the size, geographic distribution, and financial lifestyles of millionaires. The key findings were highly congruent with the numerous studies that I have conducted since that time.

I authored “The National Affluent Study 1981–1982” for a consortium of the top fifty financial institutions in America. In addition to designing this study, I traveled the country conducting focus group interviews with millionaires. Later, many of these financial institutions, including seven of the top ten trust companies in America, asked me to conduct focus group interviews and surveys of the affluent on their behalf. As a result, I had the opportunity to meet with more than 500 millionaires face to face. My interpretation of these interviews as well as many others that I conducted is given throughout The Millionaire Next Door. Interestingly, the millionaires I interviewed in Oklahoma and Texas, for example, had the same set of traditional American values as those whom I interviewed in New York City and Chicago. The large majority was keenly interested in being financially independent. That’s why they lived below their means.

Prior to writing The Millionaire Next Door, I spent nearly an entire year reviewing my survey data and the transcripts of the interviews conducted between 1982 and 1996. This extensive research and analysis, I believe, is what makes The Millionaire Next Door a perennial best seller. For the price of a book, the reader is essentially buying the equivalent of more than $1 million worth of invaluable research and interpretation.

Why do I continue to write about rich people? It is not for the benefit of rich people! What I write is designed to enlighten those who are confused and misinformed about what it means to be rich. Most Americans have no idea about the true inner workings of a wealthy household. The advertising industry and Hollywood have done a wonderful job conditioning us to believe that wealth and hyperconsumption go hand in hand. Yet, as I have said many times, the large majority of the rich live well below their means. Unfortunately, most Americans think that they are emulating the rich by immediately consuming any upward swing in their cash flow.

But the millionaire-next-door types do it differently. As one millionaire woman trained as an engineer told me, “After college my husband (also an engineer) and I both got good jobs. We lived on one income and saved the other. Anytime we got raises we just saved more. We have lived in the same modest 1,900-square-foot home for twenty years…. Sometimes my kids ask if we are poor because I make them order from the $1 value menu.”

America is still the land of opportunity. Over the past thirty years I have consistently found that 80 to 85 percent of millionaires are self-made. There is great pride, joy and satisfaction to be derived from building one’s own fortune. Countless millionaires have told me that the journey to wealth is much more satisfying than the destination. When they look back over their history of building wealth, they recall constantly setting economic goals and the great happiness gained from achieving them. Yes, in the context of economic achievement, it is the trip, the journey to financial independence about which the millionaires next door most often boast.

INTRODUCTION

Twenty years ago we began studying how people become wealthy. Initially, we did it just as you might imagine, by surveying people in so-called upscale neighborhoods across the country. In time, we discovered something odd. Many people who live in expensive homes and drive luxury cars do not actually have much wealth. Then, we discovered something even odder: Many people who have a great deal of wealth do not even live in upscale neighborhoods.

That small insight changed our lives. It led one of us, Tom Stanley, out of an academic career, inspired him to write three books on marketing to the affluent in America, and made him an advisor to corporations that provide products and services to the affluent. In addition, he conducted research about the affluent for seven of the top ten financial service corporations in America. Between us, we have conducted hundreds of seminars on the topic of targeting the wealthy.

Why are so many people interested in what we have to say? Because we have discovered who the wealthy really are and who they are not. And, most important, we have determined how ordinary people can become wealthy.

What is so profound about these discoveries? Just this: Most people have it all wrong about wealth in America. Wealth is not the same as income. If you make a good income each year and spend it all, you are not getting wealthier. You are just living high. Wealth is what you accumulate, not what you spend.

How do you become wealthy? Here, too, most people have it wrong. It is seldom luck or inheritance or advanced degrees or even intelligence that enables people to amass fortunes. Wealth is more often the result of a lifestyle of hard work, perseverance, planning, and, most of all, self-discipline.

Many people ask this question of themselves all the time. Often they are hard-working, well-educated, high-income people. Why, then, are so few affluent?

MILLIONAIRES AND YOU

There has never been more personal wealth in America than there is today (over $22 trillion in 1996). Yet most Americans are not wealthy. Nearly one-half of our wealth is owned by 3.5 percent of our households. Most of the other households don’t even come close. By “other households,” we are not referring to economic dropouts. Most of these millions of households are composed of people who earn moderate, even high, incomes. More than twenty-five million households in the United States have annual incomes in excess of $50,000; more than seven million have annual incomes over $100,000. But in spite of being “good income” earners, too many of these people have small levels of accumulated wealth. Many live from paycheck to paycheck. These are the people who will benefit most from this book.

The median (typical) household in America has a net worth of less than $15,000, excluding home equity. Factor out equity in motor vehicles, furniture, and such, and guess what? More often than not the household has zero financial assets, such as stocks and bonds. How long could the average American household survive economically without a monthly check from an employer? Perhaps a month or two in most cases. Even those in the top quintile are not really wealthy. Their median household net worth is less than $150,000. Excluding home equity, the median net worth for this group falls to less than $60,000. And what about our senior citizens? Without Social Security benefits, almost one-half of Americans over sixty-five would live in poverty.

Only a minority of Americans have even the most conventional types of financial assets. Only about 15 percent of American households have a money market deposit account; 22 percent, a certificate of deposit; 4.2 percent, a money market fund; 3.4 percent, corporate or municipal bonds; fewer than 25 percent, stocks and mutual funds; 8.4 percent, rental property; 18.1 percent, U.S. Savings Bonds; and 23 percent, IRA or KEOGH accounts.

But 65 percent of the households have equity in their own home, and more than 85 percent own one or more motor vehicles. Cars tend to depreciate rapidly. Financial assets tend to appreciate.

The millionaires we discuss in this book are financially independent. They could maintain their current lifestyle for years and years without earning even one month’s pay. The large majority of these millionaires are not the descendants of the Rockefellers or Vanderbilts. More than 80 percent are ordinary people who have accumulated their wealth in one generation. They did it slowly, steadily, without signing a multimillion-dollar contract with the Yankees, without winning the lottery, without becoming the next Mick Jagger. Windfalls make great headlines, but such occurrences are rare. In the course of an adult’s lifetime, the probability of becoming wealthy via such paths is lower than one in four thousand. Contrast these odds with the proportion of American households (3.5 per one hundred) in the $1 million and over net worth category.

THE SEVEN FACTORS

Who becomes wealthy? Usually the wealthy individual is a businessman who has lived in the same town for all of his adult life. This person owns a small factory, a chain of stores, or a service company. He has married once and remains married. He lives next door to people with a fraction of his wealth. He is a compulsive saver and investor. And he has made his money on his own. Eighty percent of America’s millionaires are first-generation rich.

Affluent people typically follow a lifestyle conducive to accumulating money. In the course of our investigations, we discovered seven common denominators among those who successfully build wealth.

In The Millionaire Next Door, you will study these seven characteristics of the wealthy. We hope you will learn how to develop them in yourself.

THE RESEARCH

The research for The Millionaire Next Door is the most comprehensive ever conducted on who the wealthy are in America—and how they got that way. Much of this research was developed from the most recent survey we conducted that, in turn, was developed from studies we had conducted over the previous twenty years. These studies included personal and focus group interviews with more than five hundred millionaires and surveys of more than eleven thousand high–net worth and/or high-income respondents.

More than one thousand people responded to our latest survey,¹ which was conducted from May 1995 through January 1996. It asked each respondent about his or her attitudes and behaviors regarding a wide variety of wealth-related issues. Each participant in our study answered 249 questions. These questions addressed topics ranging from household budget planning or lack of it to financial fears and worries, and from methods of bargaining when purchasing automobiles to the categories of financial gifts, or “acts of kindness,” wealthy people give to their adult children. Several sections of the questionnaire asked respondents to indicate the most they ever spent for motor vehicles, wristwatches, suits, shoes, vacations, and the like. This study was the most ambitious and thorough we have ever undertaken. No other study has focused on the key factors that explain how people become wealthy in one generation. Nor has a study revealed why many people, even most of those with high incomes, never accumulate even a modest amount of wealth.

In addition to our survey, we gained considerable insight into the millionaire next door from other research. We spent hundreds of hours conducting and analyzing in-depth interviews with self-made millionaires. We also interviewed many of their advisors, such as CPAs and other professional experts. These experts were very helpful in our exploration of the issues underlying the accumulation of wealth.

What have we discovered in all of our research? Mainly, that building wealth takes discipline, sacrifice, and hard work. Do you really want to become financially independent? Are you and your family willing to reorient your lifestyle to achieve this goal? Many will likely conclude they are not. If you are willing to make the necessary trade-offs of your time, energy, and consumption habits, however, you can begin building wealth and achieving financial independence. The Millionaire Next Door will start you on this journey.

MEET THE MILLIONAIRE NEXT DOOR

These people cannot be millionaires! They don’t look like millionaires, they don’t dress like millionaires, they don’t eat like millionaires, they don’t act like millionaires—they don’t even have millionaire names. Where are the millionaires who look like millionaires?

The person who said this was a vice president of a trust department. He made these comments following a focus group interview and dinner that we hosted for ten first-generation millionaires. His view of millionaires is shared by most people who are not wealthy. They think millionaires own expensive clothes, watches, and other status artifacts. We have found this is not the case.

As a matter of fact, our trust officer friend spends significantly more for his suits than the typical American millionaire. He also wears a $5,000 watch. We know from our surveys that the majority of millionaires never spent even one-tenth of $5,000 for a watch. Our friend also drives a current-model imported luxury car. Most millionaires are not driving this year’s model. Only a minority drive a foreign motor vehicle. An even smaller minority drive foreign luxury cars. Our trust officer leases, while only a minority of millionaires ever lease their motor vehicles.

But ask the typical American adult this question: Who looks more like a millionaire? Would it be our friend, the trust officer, or one of the people who participated in our interview? We would wager that most people by a wide margin would pick the trust officer. But looks can be deceiving.

This concept is perhaps best expressed by those wise and wealthy Texans who refer to our trust officer’s type as

We first heard this expression from a thirty-five-year-old Texan. He owned a very successful business that rebuilt large diesel engines. But he drove a ten-year-old car and wore jeans and a buckskin shirt. He lived in a modest house in a lower-middle-class area. His neighbors were postal clerks, firemen, and mechanics.

After he substantiated his financial success with actual numbers, this Texan told us:

[My] business does not look pretty. I don’t play the part… don’t act it…. When my British partners first met me, they thought I was one of our truck drivers…. They looked all over my office, looked at everyone but me. Then the senior guy of the group said, “Oh, we forgot we were in Texas!” I don’t own big hats, but I have a lot of cattle.

PORTRAIT OF A MILLIONAIRE

Who is the prototypical American millionaire? What would he tell you about himself?²

♦ I am a fifty-seven-year-old male, married with three children. About 70 percent of us earn 80 percent or more of our household’s income.

♦ About one in five of us is retired. About two-thirds of us who are working are self-employed. Interestingly, self-employed people make up less than 20 percent of the workers in America but account for two-thirds of the millionaires. Also, three out of four of us who are self-employed consider ourselves to be entrepreneurs. Most of the others are self-employed professionals, such as doctors and accountants.

♦ Many of the types of businesses we are in could be classified as dull-normal. We are welding contractors, auctioneers, rice farmers, owners of mobile-home parks, pest controllers, coin and stamp dealers, and paving contractors.

♦ About half of our wives do not work outside the home. The number-one occupation for those wives who do work is teacher.

♦ Our household’s total annual realized (taxable) income is $131,000 (median, or 50th percentile), while our average income is $247,000. Note that those of us who have incomes in the $500,000 to $999,999 category (8 percent) and the $1 million or more category (5 percent) skew the average upward.

♦ We have an average household net worth of $3.7 million. Of course, some of our cohorts have accumulated much more. Nearly 6 percent have a net worth of over $10 million. Again, these people skew our average upward. The typical (median, or 50th percentile) millionaire household has a net worth of $1.6 million.

♦ On average, our total annual realized income is less than 7 percent of our wealth. In other words, we live on less than 7 percent of our wealth.

♦ Most of us (97 percent) are homeowners. We live in homes currently valued at an average of $320,000. About half of us have occupied the same home for more than twenty years. Thus, we have enjoyed significant increases in the value of our homes.

♦ Most of us have never felt at a disadvantage because we did not receive any inheritance. About 80 percent of us are first-generation affluent.

♦ We live well below our means. We wear inexpensive suits and drive American-made cars. Only a minority of us drive the current-model-year automobile. Only a minority ever lease our motor vehicles.

♦ Most of our wives are planners and meticulous budgeters. In fact, only 18 percent of us disagreed with the statement “Charity begins at home.” Most of us will tell you that our wives are a lot more conservative with money than we are.

♦ We have a “go-to-hell fund.” In other words, we have accumulated enough wealth to live without working for ten or more years. Thus, those of us with a net worth of $1.6 million could live comfortably for more than twelve years. Actually, we could live longer than that, since we save at least 15 percent of our earned income.

♦ We have more than six and one-half times the level of wealth of our nonmillionaire neighbors, but, in our neighborhood, these nonmillionaires outnumber us better than three to one. Could it be that they have chosen to trade wealth for acquiring high-status material possessions?

♦ As a group, we are fairly well educated. Only about one in five are not college graduates. Many of us hold advanced degrees. Eighteen percent have master’s degrees, 8 percent law degrees, 6 percent medical degrees, and 6 percent Ph.D.s.

♦ Only 17 percent of us or our spouses ever attended a private elementary or private high school. But 55 percent of our children are currently attending or have attended private schools.

♦ As a group, we believe that education is extremely important for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren. We spend heavily for the educations of our offspring.

♦ About two-thirds of us work between forty-five and fifty-five hours per week.

♦ We are fastidious investors. On average, we invest nearly 20 percent of our household realized income each year. Most of us invest at least 15 percent. Seventy-nine percent of us have at least one account with a brokerage company. But we make our own investment decisions.

♦ We hold nearly 20 percent of our household’s wealth in transaction securities such as publicly traded stocks and mutual funds. But we rarely sell our equity investments. We hold even more in our pension plans. On average, 21 percent of our household’s wealth is in our private businesses.

♦ As a group, we feel that our daughters are financially handicapped in comparison to our sons. Men seem to make much more money even within the same occupational categories. That is why most of us would not hesitate to share some of our wealth with our daughters. Our sons, and men in general, have the deck of economic cards stacked in their favor. They should not need subsidies from their parents.

♦ What would be the ideal occupations for our sons and daughters? There are about 3.5 million millionaire households like ours. Our numbers are growing much faster than the general population. Our kids should consider providing affluent people with some valuable service. Overall, our most trusted financial advisors are our accountants. Our attorneys are also very important. So we recommend accounting and law to our children. Tax advisors and estate-planning experts will be in big demand over the next fifteen years.

♦ I am a tightwad. That’s one of the main reasons I completed a long questionnaire for a crispy $1 bill. Why else would I spend two or three hours being personally interviewed by these authors? They paid me $100, $200, or $250. Oh, they made me another offer—to donate in my name the money I earned for my interview to my favorite charity. But I told them, “I am my favorite charity.”

“WEALTHY” DEFINED

Ask the average American to define the term wealthy. Most would give the same definition found in Webster’s. Wealthy to them refers to people who have an abundance of material possessions.

We define wealthy differently. We do not define wealthy, affluent, or rich in terms of material possessions. Many people who display a high-consumption lifestyle have little or no investments, appreciable assets, income-producing assets, common stocks, bonds, private businesses, oil/gas rights, or timber land. Conversely, those people whom we define as being wealthy get much more pleasure from owning substantial amounts of appreciable assets than from displaying a high-consumption lifestyle.

THE NOMINAL DEFINITION OF WEALTHY

One way we determine whether someone is wealthy or not is based on net worth—“cattle,” not “chattel.” Net worth is defined as the current value of one’s assets less liabilities (exclude the principle in trust accounts). In this book we define the threshold level of being wealthy as having a net worth of $1 million or more. Based on this definition, only 3.5 million (3.5 percent) of the 100 million households in America are considered wealthy. About 95 percent of millionaires in America have a net worth of between $1 million and $10 million. Much of the discussion in this book centers on this segment of the population. Why the focus on this group? Because this level of wealth can be attained in one generation. It can be attained by many Americans.

HOW WEALTHY SHOULD YOU BE?

Another way of defining whether or not a person, household, or family is wealthy is based on one’s expected level of net worth. A person’s income and age are strong determinants of how much that person should be worth. In other words, the higher one’s income, the higher one’s net worth is expected to be (assuming one is working and not retired). Similarly, the longer one is generating income, the more likely one will accumulate more and more wealth. So higher-income people who are older should have accumulated more wealth than lower-income producers who are younger.

For most people in America with annual realized incomes of $50,000 or more and for most people twenty-five to sixty-five years of age, there is a corresponding expected level of wealth. Those who are significantly above this level can be considered wealthy in relation to others in their income/age cohort.

You may ask: How can someone be considered wealthy if, for example, he is worth only $460,000? After all, he’s not a millionaire. Charles Bobbins is a forty-one-year-old fireman. His wife is a secretary. They have a combined annual income of $55,000. According to our research findings, Mr. Bobbins should have a net worth of approximately $225,500. But he is worth much more than others in his income/age category. Mr. and Mrs. Bobbins have been able to accumulate an above-average amount of net worth. Thus, they apparently know how to live on a fireman’s and secretary’s income and still save and invest a good bit. They likely have a low-consumption lifestyle. And given this lifestyle, Mr. Bobbins could sustain himself and his family for ten years without working. Within their income and age categories, the Bobbinses are wealthy.

The Bobbinses are quite different from John J. Ashton, M.D., age fifty-six, who has an annual income of approximately $560,000. How much is Dr. Ashton worth? Is he wealthy? According to one definition, he is, since his net worth is $1.1 million. But he is not wealthy according to our other definition. Given his age and income, he should be worth more than $3 million.

With his high-consumption lifestyle, how long do you think Dr. Ashton could sustain himself and his family if he were no longer employed? Perhaps for two, at most three, years.

HOW TO DETERMINE IF YOU’RE WEALTHY

Whatever your age, whatever your income, how much should you be worth right now? From years of surveying various high-income/high–net worth people, we have developed several multivariate-based wealth equations. A simple rule of thumb, however, is more than adequate in computing one’s expected net worth.

Multiply your age times your realized pretax annual household income from all sources except inheritances. Divide by ten. This, less any inherited wealth, is what your net worth should be.

For example, if Mr. Anthony O. Duncan is forty-one years old, makes $143,000 a year, and has investments that return another $12,000, he would multiply $155,000 by forty-one. That equals $6,355,000. Dividing by ten, his net worth should be $635,500. If Ms. Lucy R. Frankel is sixty-one and has a total annual realized income of $235,000, her net worth should be $1,433,500.

Given your age and income, how does your net worth match up? Where do you stand along the wealth continuum? If you are in the top quartile for wealth accumulation, you are a PAW, or prodigious accumulator of wealth. If you are in the bottom quartile, you are a UAW, or under accumulator of wealth. Are you a PAW, a UAW, or just an AAW (average accumulator of wealth)?

We have developed another simple rule. To be well positioned in the PAW category, you should be worth twice the level of wealth expected. In other words, Mr. Duncan’s net worth/wealth should be approximately twice the expected value or more for his income/age cohort, or $635,500 multiplied by two equals $1,271,000. If Mr. Duncan’s net worth is approximately $1.27 million or more, he is a prodigious accumulator of wealth. Conversely, what if his level of wealth is one-half or less than expected for all those in his income/age category? Mr. Duncan would be classified as a UAW if his level of wealth were $317,750 or less (or one-half of $635,500).

PAWs VERSUS UAWs

PAWs are builders of wealth—that is, they are the best at building net worth compared to others in their income/age category. PAWs typically have a minimum of four times the wealth accumulated by UAWs. Contrasting the characteristics of PAWs and UAWs is one of the most revealing parts of the research we have conducted over the past twenty years.

A good example of the difference between PAWs and UAWs is revealed in two case studies. Mr. Miller “Bubba” Richards, age fifty, is the proprietor of a mobile-home dealership. His total household income last year was $90,200. Mr. Richards’s net worth, as computed via the wealth equation, is expected to be $451,000. But “Bubba” is a PAW. His actual net worth is $1.1 million.

His counterpart is James H. Ford II. Mr. Ford, age fifty-one, is an attorney. His income last year was $92,330, slightly more than Mr. Richards’s. What is Mr. Ford’s actual net worth? His expected level of wealth? Mr. Ford’s actual net worth is $226,511, while his expected level of wealth (again computed from the wealth equation) is $470,883. Mr. Ford, by our definition, is an under accumulator of wealth. Mr. Ford spent seven years in college. How can he possibly have less wealth than a mobile-home dealer? In fact, Mr. Richards has nearly five times the net worth of Mr. Ford. And remember, both are in the same income/age cohort. In trying to answer the above question, ask yourself two simpler questions:

♦ How much money does it take to maintain the upper-middle-class lifestyle of an attorney and his family?

♦ How much money is required to maintain the middle-class or even blue-collar lifestyle of a mobile-home dealer and his family?

Clearly, Mr. Ford, the attorney, must spend significantly more of his household’s income to maintain and display his family’s higher upper-middle-class lifestyle. What make of motor vehicle is congruent with the status of an attorney? Foreign luxury, no doubt. Who needs to wear a different high-quality suit to work each day? Who needs to join one or more country clubs? Who needs expensive Tiffany silverware and serving trays?

Mr. Ford, the UAW, has a higher propensity to spend than do the members of the PAW group. UAWs tend to live above their means; they emphasize consumption. And they tend to de-emphasize many of the key factors that underlie wealth building.

YOU OR YOUR ANCESTORS?

Most of America’s millionaires are first-generation rich. How is it possible for people from modest backgrounds to become millionaires in one generation? Why is it that so many people with similar socioeconomic backgrounds never accumulate even modest amounts of wealth?

Most people who become millionaires have confidence in their own abilities. They do not spend time worrying about whether or not their parents were wealthy. They do not believe that one must be born wealthy. Conversely, people of modest backgrounds who believe that only the wealthy produce millionaires are predetermined to remain non-affluent. Have you always thought that most millionaires are born with silver spoons in their mouths? If so, consider the following facts that our research uncovered about American millionaires:

♦ Only 19 percent receive any income or wealth of any kind from a trust fund or an estate.

♦ Fewer than 25 percent ever received “an act of kindness” of $10,000 or more from their parents, grandparents, or other relatives.

♦ Ninety-one percent never received, as a gift, as much as $1 of the ownership of a family business.

♦ Nearly half never received any college tuition from their parents or other relatives.

♦ Fewer than 10 percent believe they will ever receive an inheritance in the future.

America continues to hold great prospects for those who wish to accumulate wealth in one generation. In fact, America has always been a land of opportunity for those who believe in the fluid nature of our nation’s social system and economy.

More than one hundred years ago the same was true. In The American Economy, Stanley Lebergott reviews a study conducted in 1892 of the 4,047 American millionaires. He reports that 84 percent “were nouveau riche, having reached the top without the benefit of inherited wealth.”

BRITANNIA RULES?

Just before the American Revolution, most of this nation’s wealth was held by landowners. More than half the land was owned by people who either were born in England or were born in America of English parents. Is more than half of this nation’s wealth now of English origin? No. One of the major myths concerning wealth in this country relates to ethnic origin. Too many people think that America’s affluent population is composed predominantly of direct descendants of the Mayflower voyagers.

Let’s examine this assumption objectively. What if “country of origin” were the major factor in explaining variation in wealth? We would expect that more than half of America’s millionaire population would be of English ancestry. This is not the case (see Table 1-1). In our most recent national survey of millionaires, we asked the respondents to designate their country of origin/ancestry/ethnic origin. The results may surprise you.

Those designating “English” as their ethnic origin accounted for 21.1 percent of the millionaire population. People of English origin account for 10.3 percent of the United States household population in general. Thus, American millionaires of English origin are more prevalent than expected, given their numbers in the entire U.S. population (10.3 percent versus 21.1 percent). In other words, this group has a millionaire concentration ratio of 2.06 (21.1 percent of all millionaire households divided by 10.3 percent of all households headed by persons of English origin), meaning that people of English origin are about twice as likely to head households in the millionaire category than would be expected from their portion of all households in America.

And yet, what percentage of the English ancestry group in America is in the millionaire category? Would you expect the English group to rank first? In fact, it ranks fourth. According to our research, 7.71 percent of all households in the English category have a net worth of $1 million or more. Three other ancestry groups have significantly higher concentrations of millionaires.

How can it be possible that the English ancestry group does not have the highest concentration of millionaire households? After all, they were among the first Europeans to arrive in the New World. They were on the ground floor to take economic advantage in this land of opportunity. In 1790 Colonial America, more than two-thirds of households were headed by a self-employed person. In America, the achievements of the current generation are more a factor in explaining wealth accumulation than what has taken place in the past. Again, most American millionaires today (about 80 percent) are first-generation rich. Typically, the fortunes built by these people will be completely dissipated by the second or third generation. The American economy is a fluid one. There are many people today who are on their way to becoming wealthy. And there are many others who are spending their way out of the affluent category.

WINNING ANCESTRY GROUPS

If the English ancestry group does not have the highest concentration of millionaire households, then which group does? The Russian ancestry group ranks first, the Scottish ranks second, and the Hungarian ranks third. Although the Russian ancestry group accounts for only about 1.1 percent of all households in America, it accounts for 6.4 percent of all millionaire households. We estimate that approximately 22 of every 100 households headed by someone of Russian ancestry has a net worth of $1 million or more. This is in sharp contrast to the English ancestry group, in which only 7.71 in 100 of its members are in the millionaire league. How much wealth does this Russian American millionaire group have in total? We estimate approximately $1.1 trillion, or nearly 5 percent of all the personal wealth in America today!

How can one explain the economic productivity of Russian Americans? In general, most American millionaires are manager-owners of businesses. Russians in disproportionate numbers are manager-owners of businesses. Further, this entrepreneurial spirit seems to translate from one generation of Russians to the next.

The Hungarian ancestry group also is entrepreneurially inclined. This group accounts for only 0.5 percent of all households in this country. Yet it makes up 2 percent of the millionaire households. Contrast this with the German ancestry group, which accounts for nearly one in five households (19.5 percent) in this country. Only 17.3 percent of all millionaire households are headed by persons of German ancestry, and only about 3.3 percent of German households are in the millionaire league.

THRIFTY SCOTS

The Scottish ancestry group makes up only 1.7 percent of all households. But it accounts for 9.3 percent of the millionaire households in America. Thus, in terms of concentration, the Scottish ancestry group is more than five times (5.47) more likely to contain millionaire households than would be expected from its overall portion (1.7 percent) of American households.

The Scottish ancestry group ranks second in terms of the percentage of its clan that are in the millionaire league. Nearly twenty-one (20.8) in 100 of its households are millionaires. What explains the Scottish ancestry group’s high ranking? It is true that many Scots were early immigrants to America. But this is not the major reason for their economic productivity. Remember that the English were among the earliest immigrants, yet their concentration numbers are far lower than those of the Scots. Also consider that the Scots did not enjoy the same solid economic status that the English enjoyed during the years the nation was in its infancy. Given these facts, one would think that the English ancestry group would account for a higher concentration of millionaire households than those in the Scottish group. But just the opposite is the case. Again, the Scottish ancestry group has a concentration level nearly three times that of the English group (5.47 versus 2.06). What then makes the Scottish ancestry group unique?

If an ancestry group has a high concentration of millionaires, what would we expect the income characteristics of that group to be? The expectation is that the group would have an equally high concentration of high-income producers. Income is highly correlated with net worth; more than two-thirds of the millionaires in America have annual household incomes of $100,000 or more. In fact, this correlation exists for all major ancestry groups but one: the Scottish. This group has a much higher number of high–net worth households than can be explained by the presence of high-income-producing households alone. High-income-producing Scottish-ancestry households account for less than 2 percent of all high-income households in America. But remember that the Scottish ancestry group accounts for 9.3 percent of the millionaire households in America today. More than 60 percent of Scottish-ancestry millionaires have annual household incomes of less than $100,000. No other ancestry group has such a high concentration of millionaires from such a small concentration of high-income-producing households.

If income does not come near in explaining the affluence of the Scottish ancestry group in America, what factors do shed light on this phenomenon? There are several fundamental factors.

First, Scottish Americans tend to be frugal. Given a household’s income, there is a corresponding mathematical expectation of level of consumption. Members of this group do not fit such expectations. On average, they live well below the norm for people in various income categories. They often live in self-designed environments of relative scarcity. A household of Scottish ancestry with an annual income of $100,000 will often consume at a level typical for an American household with an annual income of $85,000. Being frugal allows them to save more and invest more than others in similar income groups. Thus the same $100,000 income–producing household of Scottish descent saves and invests at a level comparable to the typical American household that annually earns nearly $150,000.

In the chapters that follow, we reveal the highest prices typical millionaires reported paying for suits, shoes, watches, and motor vehicles. A significantly greater number of millionaires with Scottish ancestry reported paying less for each item than the norm for all millionaires in the sample. For example, more than two-thirds (67.3 percent) of Scottish millionaires paid less for their most expensive motor vehicle than the norm for all millionaires surveyed.

Because they accumulate wealth, the Scottish-ancestry affluent have wealth to pass on to their offspring. Our research reveals that Scottish offspring typically become economically and emotionally independent even as young adults. Thus, they tend not to drain their parents’ wealth.

Members of the Scottish-ancestry group have been able to instill their values of thrift, discipline, economic achievement, and financial independence in successive generations. These values are also typical traits among most self-made millionaires.

Contents