Of course, I'm leaving room for "wealthy" above rich -- that's where I'd think we're talking multi-generational money.

Ah. I was thinking of "rich" as the highest category, with gradations within that.

Where would you put private schools on that list? Someplace like Spence, say. I'd say rich, with upper-middle being able to afford it if they budgeted somewhere else. Especially for more than one kid.

Depends, plenty of people with no money go to The Dalton, Spence, and the like. Old prep schools with big endowments give lots of scholarships.

Appearances can be deceiving. I lived in a gorgeous 10+ room colonial and had a summer house growing up. But that's because we were housed by the prep school my parents worked at.

I'm assuming owning both residences when I say "maintaining".

I assume wealth when I consider "rich." Assets as well as income.

Like java, I would only use rich for people who don't have to work. Everyone else is upper-middle.

"HAVE to work" is really subjective.

I'm assuming owning both residences when I say "maintaining".

Sure, I'm just saying that, when I'm nominated to the SC, you'll all hear about my priviliged New England elitist francophile background.

That's why it's hard to make judgements about what other people "have".

"HAVE to work" is really subjective.

Have to work in order to maintain your current standard of living, then. "Money works for you" is a way of saying you can live off of dividends and interest. You can not have to work for the rest of your life and you'll be fine.

Sure, I'm just saying that, when I'm nominated to the SC, you'll all hear about my priviliged New England elitist francophile background.

Oh, that's kind of a fun game to play. I'd be an over-privileged child of stuffy academics, raised in a city synonymous with overindulgence.

Well, the French thing alone would kill my chances I think, especially given the fact that my grandfather was a communist. A French communist, but still.