What’s the different between upper middle class and upper class?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
They’re drawing $300K returns annually so something like $7.5M principal min |
Anonymous
We don’t have a cleaning person at those income levels. |
Anonymous
+1. The upper class does not need to work to maintain their lifestyle. some may work to keep busy, etc. UMC MUST to keep the house of cards up. |
Anonymous
| 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. |
Anonymous
agree - this is how I distinguish it in my mind. This ends up meaning that the upper middle pay taxes, the upper class can avoid most of them |
Anonymous
| Upper class is $10m+, really rich is $100m+ |
Anonymous
I distinguish between the wealthy and rich - rich is making $1M or $5M or whatever but you need to work to maintain your lifestyle. Wealthy is never working a day again and you can even increase your lifestyle via assets that work for you. Obviously the goal is to graduate from rich > wealthy. |
Anonymous
Obviously that isn’t what I meant. Sustain themselves and increasing net worth while not having to worry about their spending unless they make bad investments or have a child etc who spends like crazy. |
Anonymous
Yep! Craziness. |
Anonymous
Invest RETURNS. Not investments. |
Anonymous
|
There are a million miles between the two.
The short answer is this: upper class don't think all that much about money unless they are fundraising or something, and umc think about little else. |
Anonymous
No. Lol. Not even close. |
Anonymous
Well…that’s not really true…there will often be one family member who cares about about growing the money, and the rest who trust that one won’t screw it up. Perhaps they are managing staff or in charge of the family office direct. |
Anonymous
|
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. |
Anonymous
|
PP here. I also love this since I haven't read "Class" by Paul Fussell in some time. “You reveal a great deal about your class,” writes Paul Fussell, “by the amount of annoyance or fury you feel when the subject is brought up.” People of the working class, he explains, generally don’t mind thinking or talking about it, since they know there is little they can do to change their station. And nor, really, do they want to, the upper classes being perceived, for all their money, as weightless and effete, and the middle classes as slaves of the marketplace, cogs in the bureaucracy, and generally “loathsome in their anxious gentility.”
Members of the upper class don’t mind broaching the topic of class either, says Fussell, since they know themselves to be on top of the system, securely above the fray. No, it is the hard-working, hard-consuming middle class that feels the annoyance. It is the middle class that does not accept its fate and function, that believes in social mobility, that envies the style and security of the networked rich on the one hand, and the claims to authenticity of those who earn their keep by the sweat of their brows or by facing real danger, on the other. It is the middle class that is looked down upon by both sides in return, and the middle class that grumbles or walks away, denying class a role or a reality in American society even as it studies, with great care, the rungs of the ladder. |