Networth in stocks should be shown

I honestly feel networth in stocks should be shown so we can actually know better whether someone is "loaded" in liquid assets or fixed assets .

Thumbs up if you agree , so more people can see it
Thumbs down if you disagree , please do state your reasoning though ~

I have 3 stock blocks and practically $2810 in bank investment of 3 months ( 63 days now ) and yet ; close to barely a few thousands In my possession ( cash )

Someone's networth may show that they are worth this amount but they might be actually struggling with regards to cash because everything is in assets or they owe Duke ... etc

At the very least , just networth in stocks will be sufficient , don't even need the bank .

Heck , bank is even better . Someone with 2 billion networth but everything is in the bank means they have close to barely any amount for 3 months at the very least .

I am open to criticism if any , but I find it very fustrating that we judge how rich people are based on total networth and not networth based on fixed assets or liquid assets.

Results may not be entirely true if that is the case.

Why wouldn't you want to count someone's assets towards their "richness"?

Only poor people think of their wealth in terms of cash on hand.

"I have 3 stock blocks and practically $2810 in bank investment of 3 months ( 63 days now)"

Don't do this anymore friend.

This was a rookie mistake that i made on my very first few days of torn...

Yes , you can be rich as your "total networth" suggests but you can't buy anything because fixed assets unless broken down to liquiid assets ; are only valuable in the long term apart from fast moving assets for example ; a PI compared to a Villa or Mansion