This did make me chuckle

michaels

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169450#Comment_82169450

But the govt can use that big numbers thing to justify freezing or reducing the TFLS, raising taxes on pension incomes, making the state pension means tested etc….

Exodi

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82168706#Comment_82168706

I was having a conversation with my wife along the same lines just the other day.

She was whimsically contemplating what she'd do if she won a million pound - she suggested she'd give up work and live a life of luxury. She's 'only' in her mid thirties, so I curtly responded that £1M would likely only be enough to afford one of the two, not both.

She currently earns about £35k net p/a, which would be equivalent to drawing down 3.5% p/a - not an outrageous percentage, but likely higher than some would suggest as a SWR over a 60 year time frame.

But while £1M subsidises one persons income (I would still need to carry on working), despite her new found hypothetical free time, she doesn't have the surplus cash to do anything with it - she wouldn't be able to go on holidays, buy a luxury car, etc.

I think this is why 1/3rd of lottery winners eventually declare bankruptcy - you feel like have won a large amount of money so you should have things to show for it. Yet in reality £1m is just advancing the wages for a few decades worth of work.

Certainly if she did win £1m (which is unlikely considering she doesn't play the lottery), I'd personally recommend she carries on working, supercharge pensions, and get all of our ducks in a line for a comfy early retirement a decade early, maybe she could even work part time. The problem is, this doesn't sound sexy, there's no Lamborghini on the drive or Chanel handbag on her arm.

The main problem is that inflation has dramatically eroded the value of money, particularly recently.

A 'millionaire' used to have an air of exclusivity, of exuberant wealth, one that most could only dream of. Nowadays its anyone that owns a 4+ bedroom house in the South East with modest sums in a pension/ISA and was able to ride the investment wave since 2020 - yet it still has a ring to it. As the barrier to entry is fixed, give it another half a century and the average person will be a millionaire.

Albermarle

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169806#Comment_82169806

A 'millionaire' used to have an air of exclusivity, of exuberant wealth, one that most could only dream of. Nowadays its anyone that owns a 4+ bedroom house in the South East with modest sums in a pension/ISA and was able to ride the investment wave since 2020 - yet it still has a ring to it. As the barrier to entry is fixed, give it another half a century and the average person will be a millionaire.

There are various definitions of a Millionaire. Most do not include your home or your pensions, and tend to work around having at least Million in spare investable cash on top of those assets. Then there is the usual problem of are you talking about an individual or a household.

In any case I think most peoples initial vison if you mention someone is a Millionaire, is still of somebody with lots and lots of spare money to splash around on luxuries. So somebody who is in fact a multi millionaire, or billionaire.

Exodi

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169833#Comment_82169833

While I agree a better definition should be to not include your home of your pensions, I'm not sure it's the case that "Most do not include [it]"?

I watched a short documentary on this quite recently, it's actually surprisingly hard to find resources compiling this sort of data (the cynical might suggest the global elite deliberately obfuscate this information). If I look this up online (goggling 'government millionaire statistics'), the results I see:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/totalwealthingreatbritain/april2020tomarch2022

(ONS - includes property and pension)

https://www.adamsmith.org/millionaire-tracker

(Adam Smith Institute - includes property and pension).

If I looked at articles on the same topic, they cite these two sources, e.g:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/07/27/number-of-uk-millionaires-shrinks-lowest-two-decades/?WT.mc_id=tmgoff_fb_photo_millionaires-shrinks-lowest-two-decades

Unless you mean to say that most people unanimously agree amongst themselves that a millionaire is defined as someone with a liquid £1m?

Grumpy_chap

Well, that article that opens this discussion seems to be really rather just written to demonstrate the incompetence of the author. Apparently:

• 45 yo
• £900 k pension pot
• 6-figure salary
• shrewd investments
• mortgage-free
• physically healthy
• enjoys a "premium" lifestyle

So, rather a complete failure to understand the basics about pensions - i.e. the minimum age at which the pension can be accessed.

And - particularly for someone professing to have superior finance competencies - a complete failure to do the very basic mathematics that a sub £1m pension fund won't support the standard of living that an individual with £100k+ income might well be accustomed to for very long.

The phrase LOMBARD comes to mind, which reminds me of the Harry Enfield sketches, though this LOMBARD is lacking in the "LOM" department so only really "ARD".

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169882#Comment_82169882

You do realise it's a spoof, published on a satirical website?

MeteredOut

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169833#Comment_82169833

Perhaps, its a generational things, but if you stumble across certain areas of social media, you'll see a significant number of people complaining about 1 in 4 boomers being millionaires (because of their property, which they bought for a bag of coal). Was rife when the talk was around removing the triple lock.

jimi_man

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169882#Comment_82169882

Lol!!!!!!!!

That’s even funnier than the original article!

SpeedSouth

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82169863#Comment_82169863

Yep until I have liquid million I wont class myself as a true millionaire which most likely will never happen outside of pensions.

hugheskevi

You also need it to a net liquid million, as it doesn't count for much if your liquid assets arise from debt.

After excluding primary dwelling, all pension wealth, and not including anything in relation to the value of State Pension or free healthcare, quite a lot of folks won't be left with much in the way of liquid assets. You also probably won't include any physical wealth (including cars, unless investments) aside from possibly high value items, for example an art collection (not very liquid, but could be sold, and could be borrowed against as security so there would be some liquidity).

On that basis, our household's gross assets of about £3.6m are reduced to about £900,000 after removing house and pensions, and then to £330,000 after deducting all debt 😢

In about 5 years we may well be showing as having negative net liquid assets, so truly impoverished on a statistical basis. The UK's strong incentives for pension and debt financing can produce some strange-looking financial positions.