Where do you draw the line between upper middle class and upper class?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Why are you so angry about this? Being rich and being upper class aren't the same thing. Upper class is inherited wealth, not someone who worked their way up and now makes $1M in big law. I'm not saying we live a humble lifestyle with a HHI of $500K but we also can't afford to not work. We didn't get any money from our parents or other relatives. No trusts or anything. We both work every day. We are not upper class. |
Anonymous
0-1% is the barest level of poverty. I guess you could say low class but that term seems inappropriate. Impoverished is probably better. 1-99 is middle class. Within that, you have lower middle class, middle class, and upper middle class. I'd say LMC is probably 1-5%, middle class is 6-95% and UMC is 96-99%. 99-100% is upper class. |
Anonymous
they make the bulk of their income from the fought over winery and other investment vehicles, pitt was UMC when he did his first few films. there ae plenty of athletes and actors who are wealthy UMC and actually end up MC. Agree with the above pster that there is no upper class in America- theres just the super rich, they dont actually have manners, codes or anythng approaching social mores that tie them together other than piles of cash. A true upper class has a culture of some kind. Super rich americans dont have a cohesive culture, thgey only have money, pnce tehy loe the money tehy are no longer anything. Upper class from other places stay upper class at least until their own death, in USA, its pay to play. Middle class americans have a cohesive set of identifiers, beliefs and cultural touchpoints that are important to us despite pople trying to say we have 'no' culture. |
Anonymous
You’re what that article would have called “working wealthy.” It may seem like splitting hairs, but the higher you go on the income/net worth ladder, the differences become exponential. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_States These figures are based on tax returns. The top 25% income was $94k and the top 20% was $110k. Pretty close to each other. But there’s a huge gap between the top 5% ($252k) and the top 1% ($682k). And the top .1% is $3.7 million! |
Anonymous
| You’re upper class if you can buy a $30 million dollar house today; pay with cash only and with not a worry about the financial impacts of the purchase. |
Anonymous
There is no line. It's not even a gradient. Why do you even care? |
Anonymous
| Upper class does not need to be part of working class. Don’t know anyone who lives well and doesn’t work. |
Anonymous
I disagree. I would call it lower rung of "richistan", they are the lower tier of UC. UMC don't have both a comfy apartment in Manhattan and a second home, private schools for more than one kids, etc. They have to compromise. Either public schools or a second home, for example. A family sized apartment in Manhattan starts at around 2 mil, for modest ones in older buildings. You could find dumpier places or if you are ok with a 2 bedr for 1.5. Rent for a small 3 bedr would run you 10K and a lot more if you go for luxury, premium area, etc. Second homes vary, can't assume if it's a modest cabin upstate or Poconos, a condo on the beach or an SFH in a nice part of Hamptons. Either way maintaining a second home even if not expensive compared is an added cost unless they rent it out. UMC would not be able to afford maintenance on a second home and having it be unrented (having equity sit there) AND send more than one kid to private schools. This tells me that the poster not only makes 7 figures but also has a good enough NW, likely 10 mil? This will by itself put them into the lower rung of UC even by NYC standards. There are many families in NYC living in 2 bedrooms and doing public schools who never see 7 figure HHI even with 2 salaries. It's not uniformly rich, that's a myth. There is also public housing, subsidized housing for working MC, and rent control, lots of elderly on fixed incomes, lots of transient families, and many families rent for life. I know NYC very well.. she is most definitely NOT UMC. This poster's perception is skewed by her circle being a private school parent where the "floor" is people like her with the uber rich kids and a sprinkling of FA kids who she entirely ignores, but who represent a lot of NYers. She is looking up to the higher rungs of UC where the sky is the limit and there are many of those in NYC too. Her perception of UC is based on her relative "struggles" compared to others in her circles, e.g. not being able to afford every luxury while probably knowing people with private jets and yachts. Irrelevant. UC has its own tiers. |
Anonymous
That's BS. There are tiers in UC just like in middle class layers (LMC, MC, UMC). There is a book on it called "Richistan". The lowest rung is 10mil NW, maybe a bit higher today, but not significantly higher, not to the tune of having extra 30 mil laying around to pay cash on a home. You are high. Even today a family with 10 min NW can retire in comfort (UMC lifestyle with eating out and travel and outsourcing housework) not penny pinching at all unless they insist on living in multi-million dollar primary home and a second home. That's just poor fund allocation, not a "UMC struggle". I posted above breaking down the woes of the NYC poster feeling she is UMC because of her kids attending private schools with the kids who are upper rungs of richistan and comparing her lifestyle and discomforts of not affording every single luxury to the jet and yacht crowd. There are people in middle richistan who are wealthier than her and can afford luxuries she misses but would find a way to feel inadequate compared to the billionaire or near billionaire class who can buy power, influence, own large charity organizations, donate profusely to political campaigns and can afford huge losses investing into new companies that never take off. The "struggles" of the fraction of a percent are not relevant when we are talking about middle classes. We are also forgetting majority is not even middle class anymore. The curve of wealth distribution has a line kissing the x axis for 90% of people and shooting straight up into infinity and parallel to the Y axis after you cross into 0.5%. Yes, it only makes sense that people in lower rungs of UC *feel* UMC.. but this is irrelevant to the big picture. |
Anonymous
You don't know any retirees? |
Anonymous
Retirees all have the same lifestyle in retirement? 
|
Anonymous
I think it’s because there is something in between UMC and UC. I would call it “rich” but not wealthy. At $1M you are rich. You can do rich people things like own a second home and send your kids to private school. Wealthy is when you become UC and have first class or private flights, own or have friends who own yachts, don’t live off your income, etc. A rich person could become UMC more easily than become wealthy (e.g. loss of a job or chronic illness) while an UC person doesn’t have to worry about anything like that. |
Anonymous
Except half the professions and schools in England no one every heard of and in the US grown people don't talk about their parents. Also it is rude to be uppidity |
Anonymous
Yeah but the wage gap between the 95% and the 50% is multitudes closer than the 95% and 1%. Someone making 300k/year is living a much closer lifestyle compared to a family making 125k/year than a family making $5M year with tons of investments etc. Also the family making 300k could become the family making 125k through some unfortunate circumstances. The 300k family is highly unlikely to ever make anywhere near the 1%. |
Anonymous
should be "to never had to work" to not work. |