India, says a report (the world wealth report) released in early June amidst a blaze of publicity by Merrill Lynch and Cap Gemini, had 70,000 high net worth individuals at the end of 2004 (HNIs is the preferred abbreviation and the definition says they are people who have a net worth of over $1 million, Rs 4.4 crore at the current exchange rate, excluding the value of their primary residence). For the record, the report says there were 8.3 million HNIs in the world at the end of 2004.

That number, 70,000 itself may be way off the mark. Circa 2005, Rs 4.4 crore is not much by any standards. In Mumbai, it is the cost of a high-end residence; in other large Indian cities, it is 1.5 to two times that of one. It is between seven and 20 times the cost of a luxury sedan or USV. And, according to the cover story of this issue of Business Today (See Skyrocketing Salaries on Page 48), just over five times the average annual salary of a senior executive working for a multinational or a Tier-I Indian firm.

The exact numbers are not available, but Delhi alone would probably have 10,000 passenger vehicles of the kind described above. Put down a similar number for Mumbai; halve it for Bangalore and Hyderabad, and divide it by five for Kolkata and Chennai; and assume other pockets of urban or rural prosperity in India to together have 1.5 times as many luxury cars and SUVs as Delhi and tot it up. That's around 50,000 four-wheelers of the kind we are interested in. Now, assume that each household with such a car has three adult members-again, this is a conservative estimate; elementary economics and an understanding of India's family- and business-system reinforces this-with the net worth of each being over Rs 4.4 crore (again, not a very difficult thing to believe). That works out to around 150,000 HNIs, more than double the number mentioned in the report.

The objective of this composition, however, isn't to knock the numerical abilities of the good people at Merrill Lynch and Cap Gemini. It (the objective) is to highlight the fact that Indians, even the new rich, although given to ostentation and expensive status symbols, tend to discount net worth when asked about it. One reason for this is the existence of a parallel economy that, by some estimates, is at least as large as the regular one.

Another, and the more important reason, is that Indians in general, especially salarymen belonging to the earlier generation (not the one that started working in the late eighties and earlier nineties) who suddenly discover themselves earning close to Rs 1 crore a year, often more than that, are uncomfortable with their financial status. Actually, change that to uncomfortable with the world being aware of their financial status. That explains why so many of India's rich prefer to wear unbranded clothes and drive around in inconspicuous cars. There is, of course, another school of thought that says it does not make sense to make a public display of wealth because it may encourage the less-privileged to rebel (and, say, kidnap rich people or their children). That theory doesn't really fly because to most of India's poor, anyone with annual means of Rs 50,000-plus is 'rich'.

A decade-and-a-half after India decided to put its money on the free-market approach to managing an economy, there is no sign that things have changed (most of the people this magazine spoke to for the cover story, for instance, were uncomfortable discussing numbers). Yes, consumers are more confident than they have ever been (according to a survey conducted by this magazine; see page 88; and more confident than those in 28 countries in a survey of 30 countries conducted by NOP World and reported in The Economist) but their attitude towards money hasn't changed. That's unfortunate, for change it must: not just will this make the pursuit of economic prosperity a national obsession (like it has in the us where, according to the Cap Gemini/Merrill Lynch report there is one HNI for every 125 Americans), it just may spur some to pay their dues to the system.