Where do you draw the line between upper middle class and upper class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Class and wealth are related but not the same thing.

You can grow up very low income and become UMC easily by accumulating and growing wealth. But no matter how much money you make, the transition to UC is a lot harder, even from UMC, because so much of it is cultural experience shared from birth on.

There is no obvious line, no obvious amount of wealth that makes one UC vs UMC. Because, like I said, culture (from birth) plays a role here. It's kind of like what SCOTUS says about porn -- you just know it when you see it. I know UC v UMC people because my grandparents were UC. This applies to the US; I wouldn't have a clue elsewhere in the world. Because again -- it's cultural.

So Elon Musk isn't upper class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upper class you stay in the ritz or equivalent on vacations. UMC, you're staying at the JW Marriott or maybe a nice Westin. Upper class you regularly fly business or first class on your European vacation. UMC you're going to Europe but you're flying coach (maybe you cc points will upgrade you if you're lucky). Upper class you have a vacation home someplace nice like the hamptons or its equivalent. UMC, you vacation at the hamptons, but you stay in a nice air bnb.
Upper class-you bought your house in the nicest neighborhood that gets you into the best public schools, but your kid is going to private. UMC, you live near the upper class neighborhood and are zoned for the same great public schools, but private would be a stretch and if you swing for private, you're going to be staying the Courtyard Marriott on your local vacays from now on.

Nope. All this is still UMC. Upper class is private jets, yachts, and the ability to spend money at Chanel if you want.

Lol. No. This is so UMC.

+100

UC is inheriting your grandma's Chanel bags

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class and wealth are related but not the same thing.

You can grow up very low income and become UMC easily by accumulating and growing wealth. But no matter how much money you make, the transition to UC is a lot harder, even from UMC, because so much of it is cultural experience shared from birth on.

There is no obvious line, no obvious amount of wealth that makes one UC vs UMC. Because, like I said, culture (from birth) plays a role here. It's kind of like what SCOTUS says about porn -- you just know it when you see it. I know UC v UMC people because my grandparents were UC. This applies to the US; I wouldn't have a clue elsewhere in the world. Because again -- it's cultural.

So Elon Musk isn't upper class?

Musk is trash money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class and wealth are related but not the same thing.

You can grow up very low income and become UMC easily by accumulating and growing wealth. But no matter how much money you make, the transition to UC is a lot harder, even from UMC, because so much of it is cultural experience shared from birth on.

There is no obvious line, no obvious amount of wealth that makes one UC vs UMC. Because, like I said, culture (from birth) plays a role here. It's kind of like what SCOTUS says about porn -- you just know it when you see it. I know UC v UMC people because my grandparents were UC. This applies to the US; I wouldn't have a clue elsewhere in the world. Because again -- it's cultural.

So Elon Musk isn't upper class?

Musk is trash money.

I'm not asking for a commentary on how you feel about him. He lives an UC lifestyle. But you could say he has no class. Which is sort of why the distinction of UC/UMC is meaningless in the US. New money and old money aren't the same thing.

But in any event, I'll stand by the idea that income does not equal wealth, and wealth is the indicator of which class you are in (from a financial perspective, not a manners/refinement perspective).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class and wealth are related but not the same thing.

You can grow up very low income and become UMC easily by accumulating and growing wealth. But no matter how much money you make, the transition to UC is a lot harder, even from UMC, because so much of it is cultural experience shared from birth on.

There is no obvious line, no obvious amount of wealth that makes one UC vs UMC. Because, like I said, culture (from birth) plays a role here. It's kind of like what SCOTUS says about porn -- you just know it when you see it. I know UC v UMC people because my grandparents were UC. This applies to the US; I wouldn't have a clue elsewhere in the world. Because again -- it's cultural.

So Elon Musk isn't upper class?

We have a difference in this country between the rich tech bros, celebs, and athletes vs. the people who have had their family name on a building at a college campus since the 1960s, the people who sponsor the arts, the people named as ambassadors to various countries, and the people who have “foundations.” These two groups sometimes run in the same circles, to be sure. But NYC or Boston high society isn’t going to fully accept into their inner circles the successful hedge fund guy who grew up on Long Island with a teacher mom and an accountant dad and went to the local public or Catholic school. Even though that’s a perfectly acceptable, comfortable, nice, and dare I say UMC upbringing.

[Anonymous]

I’m in “those inner circles” and plenty of people here will accept anyone who has worked to make their money as long as they are generous and not ostentatious.

[Anonymous]

I hear most people say “I am middle class.” Implying anyone above them is “upper class.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It has nothing to do with "regurgitation" it has to with basic statistics and arithmetic.
 
"I guarantee you the top 9% of the wealthiest people in the U.S. make more than 300k per year."

Except it's obvious that they don't ALL make that much. Only 4 or 5% of households earn over $300K a year - so obviously it's impossible for the top 9 or 10% to all be earning at least 300K.

And that 4-5% includes everybody who makes 300K a year includes one- and two-earner working household. It includes the "idle rich." It includes those retirees who have very good incomes from their sizeable investments. It includes those who spend it all now and those who save. All that's being reported is the number of people making that level of income. All these people added up yields half the number you claim.

Also where do you get this figure that 1 in 10 American households have a $3 million net worth? I think $3 million NW is around the 95th percentile. Obviously that overlaps with the 300K+ group but obviously there are retirees whose annual income is below that in the group and some $300K HHs that either haven't accumulated that level of wealth yet or adjust their spending to match their income and don't save.

UC is defined based on wealth. Wealth includes things like inheritance, investments, assets, and income. Taking just one of those factors (income) as a dividing line for UC is meaningless. It doesn’t even make sense to look at income percentiles in assessing wealth because some wealthy people work low paying “fun jobs.” And income alone is meaningless without considering individual vs family, locality, etc. plus the fact that income is not stable throughout a lifetime. And then there is the fact that there is a much bigger divide financially between the 90th % and 99%.

If you want to continue to think a dual GS family driving their minivan to the beach for vacations is UC and shopping for kids clothes at Target is UC then I just don’t even know what to tell you.

[Anonymous]

I’ve always considered my family to be upper class because of the lifestyle we have and the types of people we spend time with. My grandparents worked in government between the 40s and the 60s And for close friends with most of the people running the country. They attended state dinners and other high-level, social events regularly, even though they were not wealthy themselves, and my mom used to describe her mortification, her clothes coming from the equivalent of Walmart. In the 60s, my grandmother married a man who was very wealthy and he fully brought her into his world. Family foundations, patrons of local institutions, black tie, events, etc. even though my parents were what I’d consider upper middle-class, grew up, understanding the world of the upper class quite well.
My husband and I have an upper class income, but tend to lead an upper middle class lifestyle in terms of how we spend it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has nothing to do with "regurgitation" it has to with basic statistics and arithmetic.
 
"I guarantee you the top 9% of the wealthiest people in the U.S. make more than 300k per year."

Except it's obvious that they don't ALL make that much. Only 4 or 5% of households earn over $300K a year - so obviously it's impossible for the top 9 or 10% to all be earning at least 300K.

And that 4-5% includes everybody who makes 300K a year includes one- and two-earner working household. It includes the "idle rich." It includes those retirees who have very good incomes from their sizeable investments. It includes those who spend it all now and those who save. All that's being reported is the number of people making that level of income. All these people added up yields half the number you claim.

Also where do you get this figure that 1 in 10 American households have a $3 million net worth? I think $3 million NW is around the 95th percentile. Obviously that overlaps with the 300K+ group but obviously there are retirees whose annual income is below that in the group and some $300K HHs that either haven't accumulated that level of wealth yet or adjust their spending to match their income and don't save.

UC is defined based on wealth. Wealth includes things like inheritance, investments, assets, and income. Taking just one of those factors (income) as a dividing line for UC is meaningless. It doesn’t even make sense to look at income percentiles in assessing wealth because some wealthy people work low paying “fun jobs.” And income alone is meaningless without considering individual vs family, locality, etc. plus the fact that income is not stable throughout a lifetime. And then there is the fact that there is a much bigger divide financially between the 90th % and 99%.

If you want to continue to think a dual GS family driving their minivan to the beach for vacations is UC and shopping for kids clothes at Target is UC then I just don’t even know what to tell you.

So do you withdraw this statement: "I guarantee you the top 9% of the wealthiest people in the U.S. make more than 300k per year."

Because first of all, it's wrong and second, it undermines whatever point you're trying to make about the upper class being different from the UMC and the difference between HH income and net wealth(but it's more like a 60% correlation though you seem to think there's little overlap at all).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always considered my family to be upper class because of the lifestyle we have and the types of people we spend time with. My grandparents worked in government between the 40s and the 60s And for close friends with most of the people running the country. They attended state dinners and other high-level, social events regularly, even though they were not wealthy themselves, and my mom used to describe her mortification, her clothes coming from the equivalent of Walmart. In the 60s, my grandmother married a man who was very wealthy and he fully brought her into his world. Family foundations, patrons of local institutions, black tie, events, etc. even though my parents were what I’d consider upper middle-class, grew up, understanding the world of the upper class quite well.
My husband and I have an upper class income, but tend to lead an upper middle class lifestyle in terms of how we spend it.

What's the difference between upper class spending and UMC spending?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always considered my family to be upper class because of the lifestyle we have and the types of people we spend time with. My grandparents worked in government between the 40s and the 60s And for close friends with most of the people running the country. They attended state dinners and other high-level, social events regularly, even though they were not wealthy themselves, and my mom used to describe her mortification, her clothes coming from the equivalent of Walmart. In the 60s, my grandmother married a man who was very wealthy and he fully brought her into his world. Family foundations, patrons of local institutions, black tie, events, etc. even though my parents were what I’d consider upper middle-class, grew up, understanding the world of the upper class quite well.
My husband and I have an upper class income, but tend to lead an upper middle class lifestyle in terms of how we spend it.

What's the difference between upper class spending and UMC spending?

It’s not the spending it’s the ability to pay off debt to be able to spend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class and wealth are related but not the same thing.

You can grow up very low income and become UMC easily by accumulating and growing wealth. But no matter how much money you make, the transition to UC is a lot harder, even from UMC, because so much of it is cultural experience shared from birth on.

There is no obvious line, no obvious amount of wealth that makes one UC vs UMC. Because, like I said, culture (from birth) plays a role here. It's kind of like what SCOTUS says about porn -- you just know it when you see it. I know UC v UMC people because my grandparents were UC. This applies to the US; I wouldn't have a clue elsewhere in the world. Because again -- it's cultural.

So Elon Musk isn't upper class?

Correct.

Filthy rich? Yes. UC, no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m in “those inner circles” and plenty of people here will accept anyone who has worked to make their money as long as they are generous and not ostentatious.

Well thank god those who made no money on their own will accept those who did! Praise the lord.

[Anonymous]

Is there a "class difference" between the 300K-ish family where it's two earners with similar incomes and the household where it's all or virtually all the income comes from the main breadwinner?

For context, about 2% of individuals (not households) earn over $250,000 or more per year.

I think any household where at least one person earns $250K is part of the upper class. If you had the spouses of those very high earners plus those with a certain net worth threshold (maybe $3 million?) you'd probably get like 3-4% of the population.