If you consider yourself Upper Middle Class (and you live in the DMV)...

[Anonymous]

Unless you have a high net worth, you aren't rich. Earning high wages at a job doesn't make your rich- it only gives you the potential to be rich.

If losing your job means that you aren't "rich" anymore- you were never rich to begin with.

We can quibble about what "high" net worth means, to be sure.

[Anonymous]

HHI - $225K
NW - $1M
Family Size - 2 (46 and 12)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm UMC because of my SES, particularly my educational level, not because of my income or net worth.

Grey Gardens types. You see these adjunct professors loading up their 30-year-old Volvos and Saabs outside of Trader Joe's. They don't have a pot to piss in, but they're desperate to think of themselves as UMC.

I'm a lawyer, third generation. Both my parents, and 3 of my 4 grandparents, graduated from college. I'm married to another lawyer. My husband and I, and all of our children, attended or attend top universities. We haven't been farmers for four generations. We do have a pot to piss in - about $7.5 million net worth, just over $400,000 in HHI - but the money is not the point.

I feel bad for the full-time adjuncts. But most tenure-line profs have it pretty good. The older ones have locked benefits, pensions, and job security (literally until you become senile).

They are almost universally upper-middle-class. And yes they tend to drive 20-year old volvos. But that is often since they don't give a shit. (I do a 30-year old BMW myself) Basically all of AU park 15 years ago.

I drive a 15+ year old car and love it, but then I'm not trying to impress anyone. With the internet, nobody cares what kind of car you drive. All someone has to do is use zillow on someone's address and see their linkedin profile to figure out generally where they stand in the social hierarchy.

Not if you're in a house much more modest than you can afford. We make $460K a year and our house is worth about $850.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you are rich. UMC is Middle class - $80-120K in this area. This is silly to pretend you are middle class on $200K or more income and that much in savings. Middle class generally don't have that kind of savings and live pay check to pay check. If you live in a million dollar house you are not UMC. If you earn what is posted here, you are not UMC.

PP: that was my point in my earlier post. Our income is high, but culturally we feel UMC. We have to work to support ourselves. I work until midnight many nights and DH and I both work for a portion of most weekends. Obviously many people with lower incomes also work this hard, and as I noted I'm aware of where our income falls in a distribution, but our lifestyle is basically the same as a family making $200k/year.

Your post says you are completely unaware. You are earning what? $300-500K and think its comparable to $200K. Many professional jobs work that many hours. You are completely unaware of how others live. We make $140-160K depending on the year and live in a fixer upper we bought for $360K that is 900 square feet. We are more in line with UMC in this area and I don't consider us UMC. You are no where culturally UMC. You probably own two nice cars, child care, a nice bigger house, housekeeper and multiple vacations a year. You aren't living anywhere close to where we are.

Here is where a lot of people are coming from--we made $140-160K and lived in a townhouse we bought for $360K that was 1000 square feet. Then we sold it and got a modest SFH (still in our close-in suburb) for $600,000 that has appreciated to $1,000,000. And our incomes went from $160K to $300K. In 25 years our 401ks went from $0 to $1,000,000. When we made $160K we were paying off student loans and paying for child care. Now we are paying for braces and facing college for two kids. So, to you, we are rich because we have a net worth of $1.5M now and an income of $300,000, but we feel like the same people and live in the same house we have since we made half as much money and live basically the same lifestyle except we put a lot more in savings. We don't feel rich, we feel....middle class. Or upper middle class if you want.

You have experienced upward social mobility. That doesn't change the fact that you're now UMC/rich. This is about data, not your feels. And the attitude expressed here shows how out of touch you are with real America and the average worker.

The average worker doesn't even go to college! Of course we are UMC - we both have graduate degrees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people are insane. Per this article, to be in the top 5% of earners in the DC area, you need to make over $250k a year:

https://statisticalatlas.com/state/District-of-Columbia/Household-Income

If you are in the TOP 5% OF EARNERS you are by definition NOT IN THE MIDDLE. DUH. You are also not in the upper middle. YOU ARE AT THE TOP. YOU ARE RICH. Yes, we do, as a society, tend to take a wide view of middle, but anyone claiming to be middle class, or upper middle class, who is making more than $250k a year, is incredibly out of step with reality.

The exact cutoff we can discuss. The top 20% cutoff is $163k. I can see an argument for that being "upper middle class." This doesn't breakdown the top 10%, but I'm guessing it's around $200k. That's a reasonable cutoff. Clearly people can disagree here, and there's nuance.

But if you're above $250k and you are claiming upper middle class, I judge you HARD. Own it. You're rich.

There are two kinds of "middle class" that for some reason nobody seems to realize on threads like these.

There's "statistical middle class" and in that kind you're totally right that basically nobody on this thread actually falls into, but the statistical middle class has very little relevance in a HCOL area like DC.

The middle class that actually matters is "lifestyle middle class." Obviously there is no one single definition but in general statistical middle class people:

Can afford to own their own home in an area with decent public schools but can't afford to live in elite enclaves or literal mansions

Are not paycheck to paycheck, but absolutely cannot afford to stop working

Can afford a car or two but not luxury/performance cars

Can afford a reasonable vacation or two every year but no first class or extravagant international destinations

Can afford to save for retirement but can't afford to retire early

And so forth. Obviously these aren't hard and fast rules and middle class people may choose to sacrifice in one area to improve another but in general that's what I'd consider a "middle class lifestyle," and the reality of the DC area is that you need to be making $150K+ to afford that.

Many of the people on this thread absolutely could quit working if they wanted to. “I’m rich but it doesn’t feel like it because I live in a very expensive house” doesn’t mean one is not rich.

No, many people have two earners with professional degrees where both people make about the same. Together they make a lot (like $250-300K) but neither one can quit. Neither salary is enough to support what would traditionally be considered a middle class lifestyle (mortgage on a reasonable house, regular cars, some college and retirement savings--->"living paycheck-to-paycheck" is the definition of working class), but together they are enough to live comfortably around here. And by the time you are in your 40s or 50s you have some equity and retirement savings so you have some net worth.

$150K/year (one spouse's income, in your example) is plenty to live on, particularly with some savings. Again, "I'm not really rich because I spend all my money on nice amenities like big houses and private schooling" is a silly argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people are insane. Per this article, to be in the top 5% of earners in the DC area, you need to make over $250k a year:

https://statisticalatlas.com/state/District-of-Columbia/Household-Income

If you are in the TOP 5% OF EARNERS you are by definition NOT IN THE MIDDLE. DUH. You are also not in the upper middle. YOU ARE AT THE TOP. YOU ARE RICH. Yes, we do, as a society, tend to take a wide view of middle, but anyone claiming to be middle class, or upper middle class, who is making more than $250k a year, is incredibly out of step with reality.

The exact cutoff we can discuss. The top 20% cutoff is $163k. I can see an argument for that being "upper middle class." This doesn't breakdown the top 10%, but I'm guessing it's around $200k. That's a reasonable cutoff. Clearly people can disagree here, and there's nuance.

But if you're above $250k and you are claiming upper middle class, I judge you HARD. Own it. You're rich.

There are two kinds of "middle class" that for some reason nobody seems to realize on threads like these.

There's "statistical middle class" and in that kind you're totally right that basically nobody on this thread actually falls into, but the statistical middle class has very little relevance in a HCOL area like DC.

The middle class that actually matters is "lifestyle middle class." Obviously there is no one single definition but in general statistical middle class people:

Can afford to own their own home in an area with decent public schools but can't afford to live in elite enclaves or literal mansions

Are not paycheck to paycheck, but absolutely cannot afford to stop working

Can afford a car or two but not luxury/performance cars

Can afford a reasonable vacation or two every year but no first class or extravagant international destinations

Can afford to save for retirement but can't afford to retire early

And so forth. Obviously these aren't hard and fast rules and middle class people may choose to sacrifice in one area to improve another but in general that's what I'd consider a "middle class lifestyle," and the reality of the DC area is that you need to be making $150K+ to afford that.

Many of the people on this thread absolutely could quit working if they wanted to. “I’m rich but it doesn’t feel like it because I live in a very expensive house” doesn’t mean one is not rich.

No, many people have two earners with professional degrees where both people make about the same. Together they make a lot (like $250-300K) but neither one can quit. Neither salary is enough to support what would traditionally be considered a middle class lifestyle (mortgage on a reasonable house, regular cars, some college and retirement savings--->"living paycheck-to-paycheck" is the definition of working class), but together they are enough to live comfortably around here. And by the time you are in your 40s or 50s you have some equity and retirement savings so you have some net worth.

$150K/year (one spouse's income, in your example) is plenty to live on, particularly with some savings. Again, "I'm not really rich because I spend all my money on nice amenities like big houses and private schooling" is a silly argument.

Sure but by that logic, aren't most people in this country rich? $40k/year is plenty to live on if you live in a homeless shelter. You can even save half your salary!

[Anonymous]

HHI 20k year in SSDI (I have a disability that is likely to turn terminal)
NW 2.5M
FS Just me, age 40

I consider myself UMC mostly because I went to expensive schools, grew up having horses/camps/nice overseas vacations/etc, have an MS and a JD, most of my friends are UMC or well off. However, if my disability is cured I'm screwed because the massive medical expenses will bankrupt me but I won't be well enough to work full-time. Currently, take about 150k a year from investments to rent a condo and pay for doctors that don't take insurance. A mixed bag, but most ppl read me as UMC as well. My NW is 100% gift/inheritance/trust. I didn't work long before becoming disabled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people are insane. Per this article, to be in the top 5% of earners in the DC area, you need to make over $250k a year:

https://statisticalatlas.com/state/District-of-Columbia/Household-Income

If you are in the TOP 5% OF EARNERS you are by definition NOT IN THE MIDDLE. DUH. You are also not in the upper middle. YOU ARE AT THE TOP. YOU ARE RICH. Yes, we do, as a society, tend to take a wide view of middle, but anyone claiming to be middle class, or upper middle class, who is making more than $250k a year, is incredibly out of step with reality.

The exact cutoff we can discuss. The top 20% cutoff is $163k. I can see an argument for that being "upper middle class." This doesn't breakdown the top 10%, but I'm guessing it's around $200k. That's a reasonable cutoff. Clearly people can disagree here, and there's nuance.

But if you're above $250k and you are claiming upper middle class, I judge you HARD. Own it. You're rich.

There are two kinds of "middle class" that for some reason nobody seems to realize on threads like these.

There's "statistical middle class" and in that kind you're totally right that basically nobody on this thread actually falls into, but the statistical middle class has very little relevance in a HCOL area like DC.

The middle class that actually matters is "lifestyle middle class." Obviously there is no one single definition but in general statistical middle class people:

Can afford to own their own home in an area with decent public schools but can't afford to live in elite enclaves or literal mansions

Are not paycheck to paycheck, but absolutely cannot afford to stop working

Can afford a car or two but not luxury/performance cars

Can afford a reasonable vacation or two every year but no first class or extravagant international destinations

Can afford to save for retirement but can't afford to retire early

And so forth. Obviously these aren't hard and fast rules and middle class people may choose to sacrifice in one area to improve another but in general that's what I'd consider a "middle class lifestyle," and the reality of the DC area is that you need to be making $150K+ to afford that.

Many of the people on this thread absolutely could quit working if they wanted to. “I’m rich but it doesn’t feel like it because I live in a very expensive house” doesn’t mean one is not rich.

No, many people have two earners with professional degrees where both people make about the same. Together they make a lot (like $250-300K) but neither one can quit. Neither salary is enough to support what would traditionally be considered a middle class lifestyle (mortgage on a reasonable house, regular cars, some college and retirement savings--->"living paycheck-to-paycheck" is the definition of working class), but together they are enough to live comfortably around here. And by the time you are in your 40s or 50s you have some equity and retirement savings so you have some net worth.

$150K/year (one spouse's income, in your example) is plenty to live on, particularly with some savings. Again, "I'm not really rich because I spend all my money on nice amenities like big houses and private schooling" is a silly argument.

Except we don't live in a big house or send our kids to private school. We live in a small house on a very small lot in a not so great neighborhood in an area with a very high cost of living -- the amenity is that we are close to public transportation and relatively close to our jobs.

Sure $150K is enough to live on, but its not enough to save for college for 2 kids and its not enough to max out your 401K and that is what you need to do. So forgive me for being annoyed at this trap -- we both work to afford a house with a 30 minute commute to our jobs, a decent school system, two Hyundais, and saving to fund our retirements (not going to get any inheritances) and our kids college (in state school.) And we're supposed to feel bad for being "out of touch"? Being able to afford a house with a 30-year-mortgage and sending your kids to a decent public school and helping pay for college is about as middle class as it gets. Its not my fault a house outside of DC costs 3x what it would cost somewhere else, so it takes twice the income to pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people are insane. Per this article, to be in the top 5% of earners in the DC area, you need to make over $250k a year:

https://statisticalatlas.com/state/District-of-Columbia/Household-Income

If you are in the TOP 5% OF EARNERS you are by definition NOT IN THE MIDDLE. DUH. You are also not in the upper middle. YOU ARE AT THE TOP. YOU ARE RICH. Yes, we do, as a society, tend to take a wide view of middle, but anyone claiming to be middle class, or upper middle class, who is making more than $250k a year, is incredibly out of step with reality.

The exact cutoff we can discuss. The top 20% cutoff is $163k. I can see an argument for that being "upper middle class." This doesn't breakdown the top 10%, but I'm guessing it's around $200k. That's a reasonable cutoff. Clearly people can disagree here, and there's nuance.

But if you're above $250k and you are claiming upper middle class, I judge you HARD. Own it. You're rich.

There are two kinds of "middle class" that for some reason nobody seems to realize on threads like these.

There's "statistical middle class" and in that kind you're totally right that basically nobody on this thread actually falls into, but the statistical middle class has very little relevance in a HCOL area like DC.

The middle class that actually matters is "lifestyle middle class." Obviously there is no one single definition but in general statistical middle class people:

Can afford to own their own home in an area with decent public schools but can't afford to live in elite enclaves or literal mansions

Are not paycheck to paycheck, but absolutely cannot afford to stop working

Can afford a car or two but not luxury/performance cars

Can afford a reasonable vacation or two every year but no first class or extravagant international destinations

Can afford to save for retirement but can't afford to retire early

And so forth. Obviously these aren't hard and fast rules and middle class people may choose to sacrifice in one area to improve another but in general that's what I'd consider a "middle class lifestyle," and the reality of the DC area is that you need to be making $150K+ to afford that.

Many of the people on this thread absolutely could quit working if they wanted to. “I’m rich but it doesn’t feel like it because I live in a very expensive house” doesn’t mean one is not rich.

No, many people have two earners with professional degrees where both people make about the same. Together they make a lot (like $250-300K) but neither one can quit. Neither salary is enough to support what would traditionally be considered a middle class lifestyle (mortgage on a reasonable house, regular cars, some college and retirement savings--->"living paycheck-to-paycheck" is the definition of working class), but together they are enough to live comfortably around here. And by the time you are in your 40s or 50s you have some equity and retirement savings so you have some net worth.

$150K/year (one spouse's income, in your example) is plenty to live on, particularly with some savings. Again, "I'm not really rich because I spend all my money on nice amenities like big houses and private schooling" is a silly argument.

Except we don't live in a big house or send our kids to private school. We live in a small house on a very small lot in a not so great neighborhood in an area with a very high cost of living -- the amenity is that we are close to public transportation and relatively close to our jobs.

Sure $150K is enough to live on, but its not enough to save for college for 2 kids and its not enough to max out your 401K and that is what you need to do. So forgive me for being annoyed at this trap -- we both work to afford a house with a 30 minute commute to our jobs, a decent school system, two Hyundais, and saving to fund our retirements (not going to get any inheritances) and our kids college (in state school.) And we're supposed to feel bad for being "out of touch"? Being able to afford a house with a 30-year-mortgage and sending your kids to a decent public school and helping pay for college is about as middle class as it gets. Its not my fault a house outside of DC costs 3x what it would cost somewhere else, so it takes twice the income to pay for it.

Of course you shouldn't feel bad. Just recognize that the lifestyle of many "middle class" people (truly people who make in the middle range of income or NW), even in an expensive area, is not a nice. Maybe they have longer commutes, maybe they aren't saving as much for college or retirement, maybe their Hyundais are older, maybe they have to pay closer attention to a grocery or travel budget. (Or maybe they are just people who bought many years before you or inherited a family home - it is true real estate mucks this up.) You have a nice lifestyle, and you work to afford it, and you are still better off than most families in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Here is where a lot of people are coming from--we made $140-160K and lived in a townhouse we bought for $360K that was 1000 square feet. Then we sold it and got a modest SFH (still in our close-in suburb) for $600,000 that has appreciated to $1,000,000. And our incomes went from $160K to $300K. In 25 years our 401ks went from $0 to $1,000,000. When we made $160K we were paying off student loans and paying for child care. Now we are paying for braces and facing college for two kids. So, to you, we are rich because we have a net worth of $1.5M now and an income of $300,000, but we feel like the same people and live in the same house we have since we made half as much money and live basically the same lifestyle except we put a lot more in savings. We don't feel rich, we feel....middle class. Or upper middle class if you want.

In a similar boat, but I feel I live a normal middle class lifestyle while also being extremely fortunate and rich. It feels like some sort of life cheat code that my investment accounts just keep growing like crazy when I'm not doing anything special (yes, I'm saving a ton in them - but I'm not actually working harder than I was at age 25, nor am I living a pauper lifestyle in order to invest). Capitalism is so weird.

I do feel differently about money than I did when we made way less, because there is just so much more margin to absorb any problems or bumps. This goes from huge financial things like extended job loss, to an unexpected expensive bill, to simply just not caring what my grocery bill is. That is the biggest difference for me between when I was truly middle class / UMC and now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Here is where a lot of people are coming from--we made $140-160K and lived in a townhouse we bought for $360K that was 1000 square feet. Then we sold it and got a modest SFH (still in our close-in suburb) for $600,000 that has appreciated to $1,000,000. And our incomes went from $160K to $300K. In 25 years our 401ks went from $0 to $1,000,000. When we made $160K we were paying off student loans and paying for child care. Now we are paying for braces and facing college for two kids. So, to you, we are rich because we have a net worth of $1.5M now and an income of $300,000, but we feel like the same people and live in the same house we have since we made half as much money and live basically the same lifestyle except we put a lot more in savings. We don't feel rich, we feel....middle class. Or upper middle class if you want.

In a similar boat, but I feel I live a normal middle class lifestyle while also being extremely fortunate and rich. It feels like some sort of life cheat code that my investment accounts just keep growing like crazy when I'm not doing anything special (yes, I'm saving a ton in them - but I'm not actually working harder than I was at age 25, nor am I living a pauper lifestyle in order to invest). Capitalism is so weird.

I do feel differently about money than I did when we made way less, because there is just so much more margin to absorb any problems or bumps. This goes from huge financial things like extended job loss, to an unexpected expensive bill, to simply just not caring what my grocery bill is. That is the biggest difference for me between when I was truly middle class / UMC and now.

But could you quit your job? There’s a difference between not stressing over a car repair bill and being rich. I get that lots of other people stress a lot more, but making $300k around here doesn’t even put us in sending the kids to private school territory, or flying first class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But could you quit your job? There’s a difference between not stressing over a car repair bill and being rich. I get that lots of other people stress a lot more, but making $300k around here doesn’t even put us in sending the kids to private school territory, or flying first class.

So is this the metric for rich? Don't have to work? Financially independent? Everyone who has to work to maintain a lifestyle is UMC or below? I basically don't worry about money at all, ever. I'm not extravagant, though, just as a personality type.

And, actually I absolute could quit my job if my spouse continued working. Or, spouse could quit if I was happy to work. We need one income to continue, but we'd still be able to save a little on either income. We both could quit with some pretty major lifestyle changes (moving to a much cheaper area), but we'd lose a the margin that makes life easy. College contributions would be questionable, but possible. But, this is probably a little more unusual - we save a large percentage of our income.

[Anonymous]

Upper middle class
$100k HHI (recently went up from $80k)
$125k NW
Family of 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But could you quit your job? There’s a difference between not stressing over a car repair bill and being rich. I get that lots of other people stress a lot more, but making $300k around here doesn’t even put us in sending the kids to private school territory, or flying first class.

So is this the metric for rich? Don't have to work? Financially independent? Everyone who has to work to maintain a lifestyle is UMC or below? I basically don't worry about money at all, ever. I'm not extravagant, though, just as a personality type.

And, actually I absolute could quit my job if my spouse continued working. Or, spouse could quit if I was happy to work. We need one income to continue, but we'd still be able to save a little on either income. We both could quit with some pretty major lifestyle changes (moving to a much cheaper area), but we'd lose a the margin that makes life easy. College contributions would be questionable, but possible. But, this is probably a little more unusual - we save a large percentage of our income.

Um, how are you not financially independent if you and your spouse could both quit your jobs and live off your savings? And continue to make college contributions? I don't understand your post. Yeah, I think that everyone who has to work to maintain a lifestyle of "30-year mortgage on a 2,000 square foot house, 2 kids in public school, saving enough to retire at 65 and put the kids through 4 years at state university" is middle class. If you make enough to save sufficient cash outside of retirement/college savings to be able to quit decades before the regular retirement age, you are far beyond middle class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But could you quit your job? There’s a difference between not stressing over a car repair bill and being rich. I get that lots of other people stress a lot more, but making $300k around here doesn’t even put us in sending the kids to private school territory, or flying first class.

So is this the metric for rich? Don't have to work? Financially independent? Everyone who has to work to maintain a lifestyle is UMC or below? I basically don't worry about money at all, ever. I'm not extravagant, though, just as a personality type.

And, actually I absolute could quit my job if my spouse continued working. Or, spouse could quit if I was happy to work. We need one income to continue, but we'd still be able to save a little on either income. We both could quit with some pretty major lifestyle changes (moving to a much cheaper area), but we'd lose a the margin that makes life easy. College contributions would be questionable, but possible. But, this is probably a little more unusual - we save a large percentage of our income.

Um, how are you not financially independent if you and your spouse could both quit your jobs and live off your savings? And continue to make college contributions? I don't understand your post. Yeah, I think that everyone who has to work to maintain a lifestyle of "30-year mortgage on a 2,000 square foot house, 2 kids in public school, saving enough to retire at 65 and put the kids through 4 years at state university" is middle class. If you make enough to save sufficient cash outside of retirement/college savings to be able to quit decades before the regular retirement age, you are far beyond middle class.

Me OR spouse. For us both to quit, we could not live here. But we could live somewhere else where housing costs are significantly cheaper.

People who make exactly the same income as me may choose other spending priorities, and spend significantly more. Private school + travel + nicer cars could eat up a big chunk. They would not be able to save as much. Does that mean they are UMC, but I'm far beyond MC?