What’s the different between upper middle class and upper class?

[Anonymous]

Upper middle class has some confidence in the future. Middle class has none.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

Np-What book is it? I don’t see why people should be ashamed about coming from poverty and achieving financial security, or why anyone would think it’s an inferior way of “being”. We cannot change our family history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

Np-What book is it? I don’t see why people should be ashamed about coming from poverty and achieving financial security, or why anyone would think it’s an inferior way of “being”. We cannot change our family history.

No, you can’t. And there is no shame in it. It’s only mildly embarrassing if you’re trying to be something you’re not. Like inventing your own coat of arms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

Np-What book is it? I don’t see why people should be ashamed about coming from poverty and achieving financial security, or why anyone would think it’s an inferior way of “being”. We cannot change our family history.

Some trust-fund kids are holding on to a dwindling family fortune, on a tight budget with no access to principal, and are insecure around "new money" folks who built something of value to society. Those are the people projecting inferiority onto people who achieved something on their merits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

Np-What book is it? I don’t see why people should be ashamed about coming from poverty and achieving financial security, or why anyone would think it’s an inferior way of “being”. We cannot change our family history.

Its called Class and it's by Paul Fussell. In many ways it's The Preppy Handbook writ large.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

That's not just according to Fussell. It's also true across societies and time periods. The noveau riche can't do it even though they have "f you" money, because the old money is always judging them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upper Class: This is the realm of traditional blue-blooded elites who, although they lack the almost mythical wealth of their higher counterparts, still wield considerable influence. Think of families like the Kennedys and Roosevelts — families who, according to Fussell, are obviously extremely elite but too “public” to be placed in the higher “top out of sight” tier.

Upper Middle Class: This class represents the backbone of educated professionals who, while not possessing the lineage or heritage wealth of the ‘Upper Class’, nonetheless hold significant sway within society. If the ‘Upper Class’ is defined by heritage and wealth, then the ‘Upper Middle Class’ is defined by education. Here, you’ll find a plethora of Ivy League degrees and advanced qualifications. Universities are seen not merely as gateways to professional success but as indispensable institutions for cultural enlightenment and social bonding. As for professions, expect a broad spectrum. They’re your accomplished lawyers, seasoned doctors, university professors, and successful small business owners. Their careers offer more than economic comfort — they command societal respect and intellectual satisfaction. Culturally, the ‘Upper Middle Class’ champions meritocracy and the pursuit of personal growth. They place a high premium on cultural literacy, aesthetic refinement, and intellectual curiosity. In essence, the ‘Upper Middle Class’ values are rooted in achievement through dedication and education rather than inherited status. They are the embodiment of the American dream, where one can rise through the ranks via hard work and intellectual acumen.

Note class is what you're born into, not the money you have. A blue collar plumber who wins the lottery or happens to sell his business for $20 million is still High Proletarian. Now, his kids might level up. That is, no matter how much sheen you put on it, you will find your class markers betraying you even if you become successful and wealthy. For instance, I know some very wealthy and successful people who grew up poor and their very nice and tasteful house is packed with food. Like ridiculous and wasteful amounts of food -- because it's a sign of comfort and of the trauma due to food insecurity that they experienced as children. That's a sure sign that they were born lower middle class or lower.

Most of this sounds straight out of chatgpt, with all the attendant lack of understanding.

Oh please enlighten us on what is misunderstood. This was pulled from notes from Paul Fussell's book, "Class" along with personal anecdotes and recognizing it's a wonderful, albeit dated guide to class distinctions in America. Or perhaps I struck a nerve because it hit too close to home? If it did, then it's probably because you're decidedly middle class and insecure.

Lady white people are about to be a minority in America. The days of the illustrious blue bloods are dated. Dying breed, to be frank. Too many generations now and too much dilution.

Nice that you think that but you are wrong. There will always be UC WASP culture. There is already UC Hispanic culture. The future will mean that there will also be UC American Asian, Persian, Nigerian, etc. People bring their culture with them and adapt it.

I grew up in UC WASP circles - Mayflower, DAR, boarding school, CT, Maine summer compound, NESCAC college, all that good stuff - and it’s definitely dying in my POV.

Nah, YOU are just falling in status, so your line is dying and becoming MC. I’m also WASP - mayflower, DAR, private (not boarding) school. The landscape is evolving as it always has and we are still going strong - we just interact with more diverse circles of UC, where our predecessors were more racist and we are much less so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

That's not just according to Fussell. It's also true across societies and time periods. The noveau riche can't do it even though they have "f you" money, because the old money is always judging them.

No one cares about old money in this day and age, though. It just doesn't matter anymore. Tech money is the indisputed ruler of our society now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, it’s harder to use your legacy status or be assured that your kids will be guaranteed a place at certain exclusive or status conscious institutions. And whatever advantages they have, these have to be couched as “merit” and “hard work” rather than legacy and connections. They’re also being outmuscled and outhustled by UMC professionals. For example, they may still make partner at a law firm but it’s probably not a top tier one anymore and they’re expected to produce rather than coast on their credentials. I also think tech is much more egalitarian and that’s where most of the wealth is being generated these days. As a random aside, I’ve seen quite a few of these mediocre legacy white guys fail out of more serious professions and go into crypto. It seems like the fallback, fallback option for failsons these days.

So true, but mainly because US has accepted more UC foreigners with privileges AND UC women want the privileges their brothers have - so the privilege market is flooded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

That's not just according to Fussell. It's also true across societies and time periods. The noveau riche can't do it even though they have "f you" money, because the old money is always judging them.

No one cares about old money in this day and age, though. It just doesn't matter anymore. Tech money is the indisputed ruler of our society now.

People cared enough about old money recently enough that Donald Trump has a huge chip on his shoulder...and look where that got us.

Tech money is certainly doing things, but I'm not sure they rule society the same way the WASPs did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the upper class in 2026 is $15m in net worth or more. Upper middle class is $3-15m. Also, HENRYs (High Earner, Not Yet Rich) are UMC if they are under 40, but above that, if they haven't accumulated $3m, they are just high earners who overspend.

This isn’t “class” it’s financial standing. The question was about “class”. You can be very wealthy and LC - just look at many NFL players or Mike Tyson or Eminem etc. they are rich lower class people. I could never marry one of them and have them accepted into my WASP family - they’d have a heart attack. It’s not just about money; it’s all about culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

That's not just according to Fussell. It's also true across societies and time periods. The noveau riche can't do it even though they have "f you" money, because the old money is always judging them.

No one cares about old money in this day and age, though. It just doesn't matter anymore. Tech money is the indisputed ruler of our society now.

People cared enough about old money recently enough that Donald Trump has a huge chip on his shoulder...and look where that got us.

Tech money is certainly doing things, but I'm not sure they rule society the same way the WASPs did.

Donald Trump is old AF. Any such analysis related to him is about two decades out of date. Look at the celebrities and cultural markers he's obsessed with. He's stuck in the 80's and 90's; times have changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

That's not just according to Fussell. It's also true across societies and time periods. The noveau riche can't do it even though they have "f you" money, because the old money is always judging them.

No one cares about old money in this day and age, though. It just doesn't matter anymore. Tech money is the indisputed ruler of our society now.

People cared enough about old money recently enough that Donald Trump has a huge chip on his shoulder...and look where that got us.

Tech money is certainly doing things, but I'm not sure they rule society the same way the WASPs did.

Donald Trump is old AF. Any such analysis related to him is about two decades out of date. Look at the celebrities and cultural markers he's obsessed with. He's stuck in the 80's and 90's; times have changed.

I agree. I think the internet ruined a lot of this because it democratized information and homogenized culture. Anyone can read up on “Class” this days. Anyone can become an “influencer” since we no longer have strong cultural and civic gatekeepers. Being a “poser” or sellout used to be the worst thing you could be - there’s no shame to strivers and wannabes anymore. Similarly, our modern tech robber barons have shown no willingness to be culture or civic leaders aside from some childhood nerd desires like outer space and robots. None of them are really investing in this country other than virtually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on these responses you can be upper class while earning $100k in investments, sitting on a not for profit board and living extremely modestly. But upper middle while earning $1 million.

We are borderline of UMC and UC. $3m HHI, few properties, can technically retire but cannot maintain current lifestyle without working.

Some people may say we are definitely UC. I consider ourselves UMC.

If you were born UMC your tastes will be - and that really define you. You are just rich UMC. Strivers here don’t get that.

Wait. Class has come up several times on this thread, and isn't that what that entire book is all about?

Yes. That’s the whole point of the book and what a lot of middle class folks find so off putting. It’s also why they hate talking about class (ie, because they’re deeply insecure about their own class position with some even using threads like this as a crowdsourced “how to social climb” manual). No matter how much money they have, they’ll never live down their middle or lower class upbringing. It’ll manifest itself through various tells and behaviors. So folks should just relax a little stop striving.

A lot of truly wealthy people don't care about "class" - and why should they? They have enough money to buy a ranch in Jackson Hole to get away from classists. Also, money may not equal class, but it is a prerequisite to class. No one cares about your family of origin if you're broke or working in mid-level management.

That’s another point of what true UC is according to Fussell. They have “f you” money that allows them to be weird or cheap or rude in ways that are more aligned with the working classes. And their wealth and class allows them to get away with it.

That's not just according to Fussell. It's also true across societies and time periods. The noveau riche can't do it even though they have "f you" money, because the old money is always judging them.

No one cares about old money in this day and age, though. It just doesn't matter anymore. Tech money is the indisputed ruler of our society now.

People cared enough about old money recently enough that Donald Trump has a huge chip on his shoulder...and look where that got us.

Tech money is certainly doing things, but I'm not sure they rule society the same way the WASPs did.

Donald Trump is old AF. Any such analysis related to him is about two decades out of date. Look at the celebrities and cultural markers he's obsessed with. He's stuck in the 80's and 90's; times have changed.

I agree. I think the internet ruined a lot of this because it democratized information and homogenized culture. Anyone can read up on “Class” this days. Anyone can become an “influencer” since we no longer have strong cultural and civic gatekeepers. Being a “poser” or sellout used to be the worst thing you could be - there’s no shame to strivers and wannabes anymore. Similarly, our modern tech robber barons have shown no willingness to be culture or civic leaders aside from some childhood nerd desires like outer space and robots. None of them are really investing in this country other than virtually.

Now, you get celebrated in Netflix documentaries!