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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

We're at 350k and the vast majority of that is dh...I'd never call us Upper Class. It took us until our 40s to get to that income, and we're living very normally with no luxury anything, we're saving for college, cannot afford to send our kids everywhere...To me upper class isa beautiful large house, first class, best hotels, your child can pick the college of their choice regardless of cost...

[Anonymous]

Living "normally" how? Do you get worried every month with your bills and you've maxed your credit card? Are you worried that you won't have enough money for retirement because you don't have savings, investments or good pensions?

But in the bubble you live in, precariousness is abnormal. Even though the precariat in this country outnumbers people like you by about 5 to 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Living "normally" how? Do you get worried every month with your bills and you've maxed your credit card? Are you worried that you won't have enough money for retirement because you don't have savings, investments or good pensions?

But in the bubble you live in, precariousness is abnormal. Even though the precariat in this country outnumbers people like you by about 5 to 1.

No, I'd say we're UMC. Not Upper Class though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/line-between-middle-class-upper-110130857.html

Varies by state.

I love that you provided actual data.

Short version - upper middle class ends around 200k in DC/MD/VA (175 in Virginia as whole, NoVa would probably be closer to 200k)

Oh yay! DH and I with our 290k HHI from 2 fed salaries and our 2,300 sq ft 1940s rambler, and 529s that will hopefully cover state schools someday are upper class! I’m so excited to hear this. We are basically the same as the people who own second homes in Nantucket and spend their breaks aboard yachts.

Yes, you are upper class. Sorry if that offends you. Does that mean you are obscenely wealthy? Not it does not. But 95 percent of households in the US make less than yours does. I don't know how much more plainly it can be put. You (like me in my similar circumstances) are upper class.

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%.

300k is not that far from the 1%.

"According to the US Census Bureau's 2020 Current Population Survey, the percentage of American households with incomes of $300,000 or more is about 3.8%. This means that approximately 3.8% of American households have an annual income of at least $300,000 before taxes and other deductions.""

And 125K? That's about the 75th percentile.

It depends on what state you live in. The wealthiest states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Washington state, California, New Jersey and New York. The 1% income is slightly more than $1 million per year. 300k is pretty far from the 1%

On the other hand 300k is not that far from West Virginia, Mississippi, and Kentucky’s 1% population. These states top 1% incomes are $435k to $550k. Not as big a gap.

People’s perception of wealth depends on where they live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Class is more about lifestyle than income and assets. Most places in the US, we would have a more upper class lifestyle, but we live close to DC and so we’re UMC.

UMC - we own our home and drive well maintained, reliable cars. We go on 1-2 vacations a year and pay for travel sports and music lessons for kids in local public schools. We own stocks and we save money for retirement and college. We work in white-collar knowledge based jobs. We have investments and will inherit money, but we will need to work full time until a traditional retirement age of 65.

Upper class is like UMC but has 2 or more of the following:
kids in private school
2nd home
2+ vacations, some international or luxury accommodations
Doesn’t need to work a W-2 job or is able to work a passion job
Home is professionally decorated and/or landscaped
Makes most decisions based on personal preferences instead of cost/value/ROI

Really this is the key piece.

I'm sorry, but if you can't afford to maintain your lifestyle if you stop working, you're not UC.

Middle class is like UMC except instead of being a relaxing, enjoyable lifestyle they have to budget carefully to make it all work. They make choices between retirement and college saving. They may have to choose between expensive extracurriculars for the kids and vacations. If they don’t make sacrifices or trade offs, they are living in debt or can never retire.

What do you mean by can "never" retire? Everyone above age 65 gets medicare and if you have no assets and are that poor you can get Medical or whatever that part is called that literally covers everything. You get SS at 65, it can be measly but there is senior subsidized housing that will only bill you a specific fraction of your monthlies. If you are poor you can qualify. If you feel like you are trying to maintain MC lifestyle but will likely be wiped out there is no reason to hold on to anything. It's better to retire poor than MC, you will never be able to accumulate enough cash if you aren't doing well into the old age to come close to what benefits will pay you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/line-between-middle-class-upper-110130857.html

Varies by state.

I love that you provided actual data.

Short version - upper middle class ends around 200k in DC/MD/VA (175 in Virginia as whole, NoVa would probably be closer to 200k)

Oh yay! DH and I with our 290k HHI from 2 fed salaries and our 2,300 sq ft 1940s rambler, and 529s that will hopefully cover state schools someday are upper class! I’m so excited to hear this. We are basically the same as the people who own second homes in Nantucket and spend their breaks aboard yachts.

Yes, you are upper class. Sorry if that offends you. Does that mean you are obscenely wealthy? Not it does not. But 95 percent of households in the US make less than yours does. I don't know how much more plainly it can be put. You (like me in my similar circumstances) are upper class.

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%.

300k is not that far from the 1%.

"According to the US Census Bureau's 2020 Current Population Survey, the percentage of American households with incomes of $300,000 or more is about 3.8%. This means that approximately 3.8% of American households have an annual income of at least $300,000 before taxes and other deductions.""

And 125K? That's about the 75th percentile.

Again- exponential differences between percentiles at the highest levels. The person at the top 3.8% making $300k a year is living a lifestyle closer to the person at the top 25%/$125k a year than they are to the person at the top 1% making close to $700k/year. And the top 3.8 and top 1% are living closer to each other than to the .1%er making multiple millions.

[Anonymous]

So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

True wealth is the ability to not need to work a job either way. Neither is “wealthy”.

[Anonymous]

Most people consider "the rich" as those who make twice as much as they do, and "the poor" as those who make half as much as they do--regardless of what they themselves make. This rule applies whether someone is making 40K a year or 400K a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

True wealth is the ability to not need to work a job either way. Neither is “wealthy”.

We have a $2-3m HHI. I always tell my kids that we are not rich because they have to work to support themselves. Rich people don’t have to work. While we have enough saved to send them to college and grad school, they are on their own to support themselves and their future families.

My one kid says we are the lowest of the rich. This is very true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

True wealth is the ability to not need to work a job either way. Neither is “wealthy”.

We have a $2-3m HHI. I always tell my kids that we are not rich because they have to work to support themselves. Rich people don’t have to work. While we have enough saved to send them to college and grad school, they are on their own to support themselves and their future families.

My one kid says we are the lowest of the rich. This is very true.

You’re rich. Not even the lowest of the rich, simply rich. Stop deluding yourself and your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

It's not linear though, you get that right? I wouldn't say the CEO earning $1 million is anything like either of those people, but you can't say that they are farther from the $100 million hedge fund manager than the low income worker by a factor of 10.

[Anonymous]

I make 250 and DH makes 900. All of our income is W2. We are def UMC but I don't know about UC. We certainty can afford most of what we want. But when I think UC or Rich, I think of yachts, private planes, 5,000/night hotel rooms. We don't have 200K to spend on a weeks vacation---that's what I think of as UC/Rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

True wealth is the ability to not need to work a job either way. Neither is “wealthy”.

We have a $2-3m HHI. I always tell my kids that we are not rich because they have to work to support themselves. Rich people don’t have to work. While we have enough saved to send them to college and grad school, they are on their own to support themselves and their future families.

My one kid says we are the lowest of the rich. This is very true.

Wow, you raised your kids so poorly! The reality is you like a very materialistic lifestyle, and you need to work to support your spending habits. Most people could make that hhi for one or two years and be set for life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So is the CEO of a midsized firm earning $1 million a year "closer" to the low income worker earning $30,000 than the hedge fund manager earning $100 million a year?

After all, 1,000,000 - 30,000 = 970,000
100,000,000 - 2,000,000 = 99,000,000

True wealth is the ability to not need to work a job either way. Neither is “wealthy”.

We have a $2-3m HHI. I always tell my kids that we are not rich because they have to work to support themselves. Rich people don’t have to work. While we have enough saved to send them to college and grad school, they are on their own to support themselves and their future families.

My one kid says we are the lowest of the rich. This is very true.

Even the lowest of the rich do not actively work. They own properties, hotel chains, buildings, real estate, which gives them the income. The most work they may do is sell land to a rural county for development use. Not active hands on work.