Oh I see.
I was trying to explain why I would be more wealthy if I moved to the North. The answer is that I would owe significantly less money to the bank and therefore have more disposable income. Relatively speaking I would be much wealthier in terms of my income. This is why I specifically excluded the main property from wealth.
You can be living in a tired old former council house and not be wealthy, but become hugely wealthy if you decide to sell it and move to Rotherham due to the cash that you would extract from the property sale. If you don't want to move to Rotherham it doesn't matter if your 3 bed ex-council house is worth 2 million pounds, because you live there.
If the House a person lives in is worth £2million, but, they owe the Mortgage Company, £1.9 million, isn't that exactly the same as a person living in a £200,000 house, and owing the mortgage company £100,000? ie, in both cases, their "equity" is £100k. I agree, their mortgage payments in the latter case would be less, and, they would therefore have more disposable income.
The original post used the word "rich", now, we have "wealth", "wealthier in terms of income" and "disposable income" introduced, this simple concept of "rich" seems to be becoming more complex?
