Ahhh feels good to be in the middle class at 300k a year

[Anonymous]

the british definitions of class are much better than the american definitions of class.

americans have warped what 'middle class' means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, "decent" homes can be purchased in DC for far less than 800-900K. That price point is the going rate for the most affluent neighborhoods in DC.

YES, so true. We bought our house for under 500K in a neighborhood which is changing rapidly and in the right direction. We love it here. People dont NEED to live in 800-900K houses in DC or the burbs. They choose to. My parents live comfortably in a 350K house in wheaton and they love it. That would be like them saying that unless they can afford a house in Chevy Chase, they are hitting the poverty line. If you want to claim you have the same amount of disposable income as my family does so you must be middle class but own a million dollar house in DC or the burbs because you HAVE to in order to live properly, you are delusional. That is a choice to live in that zip code!

Again, my inlaws live in the same type of home with same quality of neighborhood outside of DC on 1/2 the salary. It's the cost of living. I understand it's rough in our area and people make sacrifices but it happens everywhere and the same 70k salaries are half that in other areas. I don't really get how people don't understand that.

Yes, DC is more expensive for housing than MD. But they are close enough that people who cant afford DC in the neighborhood they would like are living in MD instead and still working the same job so it is a choice. I myself lived in a house I owned in MD that I bought a third of the cost of the house I own in DC. I worked in DC at the time. Funny thing, I had almost exactly the same disposable income at that time as I do now at the end of every month. But now I make 4x more money and I save, have an emergency fund, retirement... Should I be defined as middle class in both scenarios? I think not. The cost of living isnt that different - food, electricity, healthcare, gas, etc....the real estate costs are different IMO and they are an indicator of wealth and income. So is having ample savings, retirement, college funds, etc...I also have a nicer car - a choice. I need a car obviously just like I need to have a home to live in but both are purchases that bring down my monthly disposable income. I would never define myself as middle class though because I have been that and I am fortunate that I am not in that position any more. And I feel it is insulting to people who are living paycheck to paycheck.

[Anonymous]

Think working in a coal mine actually pays well. Just like oil rigging. Blue collar but good pay and benefits.

[Anonymous]

450k is rich http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/31/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-rich/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Think working in a coal mine actually pays well. Just like oil rigging. Blue collar but good pay and benefits.

Not really. A coal miner in Kentucky gets paid about $75K. In west virginia the salaries range from about $65 for a newer one to about 85 for an experienced one.


In return for that they face a great risk of injury or death, and the very real chance of a lifetime of health issues such as black lung. There is no guarantee that the health care they are promised will still be there by the time they retire.

So there really are two types of people who take the job: those who have little concern for the downside, and those who just don't know any other way of life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whiners who think that $250K is not rich or $300K is middle class are ones who for some odd reason seem to think that terms like "middle class" and "rich" are defined as absolute terms that mean a certain life style rather than a relative term compared to the rest of society.

Once again, for those in the back playing with their iPhones and not paying attention, "middle class" is that section in the MIDDLE of the income earning population or those in the MIDDLE of the household wealth owners. That is roughly those in the 25th to 75th percentile. For income, the median HHI in the nation is about $50-60K. For the DC metro area, the median HHI is about $75-90K (about $75 in the district and about $85-90K in the suburbs). The 25th to 75th percentiles nationwide are about $35K-125K depending on area and the 25th to 75th percentiles in the DC area are about $40K-150K. Median net worth in 2010 was about $55K-75K (depending on which source you cite, CBS is at the low end, CNN at the high end). While the DC area has 7 of the 10 highest wealth counties in the country, the #1 (Loudon County) is only $119K. The median in the DC area is probably somewhere around $100K (that's conjecture on my part).

Those who make $250K HHI or more, who have homes, IRAs or 401Ks, 529s and such with several hundred thousand in retirement, college savings, home equity, etc are so far from the middle class, it's a joke that you're claiming to be part of the middle class. The middle class is not the same as it was when Ward and June Cleaver were bringing up the Beav. Even if it was, you're still beyond that. The average household size in the 1950's was under 1500 sq ft. The house that my parents bought in 1957 that they had my two siblings in was about 1300 sq ft. That was about average. The average house now is about 2400 sf--nearly double the size. In 1950, most households had one car. Now, most households have two, especially the ones with $250K+. Average, middle class people in the 1950's did not live in the areas with the BEST schools either. Those areas were still above median and were expensive even then.

So those who think that living in the areas with the best schools, having an "average" size house and two cars (whether they are old or not) plus retirement, 529's, extras, vacations, are way out of the realm of middle class. You are in the top 2-3% of the nation and whining that you aren't in the top 1%. You all need a very big reality check.

hmmm, we have 1 car, live in a house under 1200 sq. ft., and certainly don't live in the best school zone according to dcum.... but somehow I'm rich according to you... your definition by statistics of income is the definition of middle income, not a definition of what was the start of the "middle class"... fact is, the middle income are much worse off now, than they were in 1950, and this is a good thing how? just so the rich can have 5 more houses than they did in 1950?... as someone you claim is rich, I'm quite ticked off that most of america finds this income disparity is fair...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whiners who think that $250K is not rich or $300K is middle class are ones who for some odd reason seem to think that terms like "middle class" and "rich" are defined as absolute terms that mean a certain life style rather than a relative term compared to the rest of society.

Once again, for those in the back playing with their iPhones and not paying attention, "middle class" is that section in the MIDDLE of the income earning population or those in the MIDDLE of the household wealth owners. That is roughly those in the 25th to 75th percentile. For income, the median HHI in the nation is about $50-60K. For the DC metro area, the median HHI is about $75-90K (about $75 in the district and about $85-90K in the suburbs). The 25th to 75th percentiles nationwide are about $35K-125K depending on area and the 25th to 75th percentiles in the DC area are about $40K-150K. Median net worth in 2010 was about $55K-75K (depending on which source you cite, CBS is at the low end, CNN at the high end). While the DC area has 7 of the 10 highest wealth counties in the country, the #1 (Loudon County) is only $119K. The median in the DC area is probably somewhere around $100K (that's conjecture on my part).

Those who make $250K HHI or more, who have homes, IRAs or 401Ks, 529s and such with several hundred thousand in retirement, college savings, home equity, etc are so far from the middle class, it's a joke that you're claiming to be part of the middle class. The middle class is not the same as it was when Ward and June Cleaver were bringing up the Beav. Even if it was, you're still beyond that. The average household size in the 1950's was under 1500 sq ft. The house that my parents bought in 1957 that they had my two siblings in was about 1300 sq ft. That was about average. The average house now is about 2400 sf--nearly double the size. In 1950, most households had one car. Now, most households have two, especially the ones with $250K+. Average, middle class people in the 1950's did not live in the areas with the BEST schools either. Those areas were still above median and were expensive even then.

So those who think that living in the areas with the best schools, having an "average" size house and two cars (whether they are old or not) plus retirement, 529's, extras, vacations, are way out of the realm of middle class. You are in the top 2-3% of the nation and whining that you aren't in the top 1%. You all need a very big reality check.

hmmm, we have 1 car, live in a house under 1200 sq. ft., and certainly don't live in the best school zone according to dcum.... but somehow I'm rich according to you... your definition by statistics of income is the definition of middle income, not a definition of what was the start of the "middle class"... fact is, the middle income are much worse off now, than they were in 1950, and this is a good thing how? just so the rich can have 5 more houses than they did in 1950?... as someone you claim is rich, I'm quite ticked off that most of america finds this income disparity is fair...

Oh please, if that's the case, you probably opted to buy in a desirable, walkable area. I live in DC with under 900 sq and don't feel crowded in my condo. I CHOSE easy access and walkability over space. We do charter (a good one). You could have purchased more space and land but you chose otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright. All of you people whining about the high cost of housing in DC are free to move to Ohio or New Mexico. Otherwise, please stop already. You've made a choice to leave here, now deal with it. You can go elsewhare and be more then "middle class" if you want.

I have no desire to leave what I am getting at is Obama and the Senate have gotten over the whole 250k rich BS and so should everyone else.

They haven't "gotten over" anything; they've just compromised. That's politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alright. All of you people whining about the high cost of housing in DC are free to move to Ohio or New Mexico. Otherwise, please stop already. You've made a choice to leave here, now deal with it. You can go elsewhare and be more then "middle class" if you want.

I have no desire to leave what I am getting at is Obama and the Senate have gotten over the whole 250k rich BS and so should everyone else.

They haven't "gotten over" anything; they've just compromised. That's politics.

Maybe you should get over it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
hmmm, we have 1 car, live in a house under 1200 sq. ft., and certainly don't live in the best school zone according to dcum.... but somehow I'm rich according to you... your definition by statistics of income is the definition of middle income, not a definition of what was the start of the "middle class"... fact is, the middle income are much worse off now, than they were in 1950, and this is a good thing how? just so the rich can have 5 more houses than they did in 1950?... as someone you claim is rich, I'm quite ticked off that most of america finds this income disparity is fair...

If you make a HHI of $250K, then you are by definition in the top 2% of the nation's earner, yes, you are rich.

There are many homes in the DC area that are over 2000 sf and cost under $500K. Frankly, those who live in the desirable neighborhoods are pretty much by definition rich. Yes, you have the ability to afford luxuries that most cannot, including having the choice of location because of your income. You have chosen to live in a more expensive area. Just because your home is under 1200 sf and not in the best school zone, does not make it undesirable or less expensive by definition). There are plenty of homes that are move expensive because the areas are more walkable or close-in so that commute to the city center is much easier. Those are premiums that you pay for that many do not even have the option to consider.

Yes, the income disparity between the middle class, the upper middle class, the rich and the wealthy have all grown larger since 1950. That however, does not change the fact that you are better off than 98% of the American population. In fact you make close to 500% of what the median family in American makes. With close to 115M households in the US, you make 5 times or more than 57M households. You make more than 112.5M households. You are in the top 2M households out of 115M in America. Yes, despite your whining, you are rich. And you have a lower amount of disposable income because you made expensive choices, but choices that you have, that many do not have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
hmmm, we have 1 car, live in a house under 1200 sq. ft., and certainly don't live in the best school zone according to dcum.... but somehow I'm rich according to you... your definition by statistics of income is the definition of middle income, not a definition of what was the start of the "middle class"... fact is, the middle income are much worse off now, than they were in 1950, and this is a good thing how? just so the rich can have 5 more houses than they did in 1950?... as someone you claim is rich, I'm quite ticked off that most of america finds this income disparity is fair...

If you make a HHI of $250K, then you are by definition in the top 2% of the nation's earner, yes, you are rich.

There are many homes in the DC area that are over 2000 sf and cost under $500K. Frankly, those who live in the desirable neighborhoods are pretty much by definition rich. Yes, you have the ability to afford luxuries that most cannot, including having the choice of location because of your income. You have chosen to live in a more expensive area. Just because your home is under 1200 sf and not in the best school zone, does not make it undesirable or less expensive by definition). There are plenty of homes that are move expensive because the areas are more walkable or close-in so that commute to the city center is much easier. Those are premiums that you pay for that many do not even have the option to consider.

Yes, the income disparity between the middle class, the upper middle class, the rich and the wealthy have all grown larger since 1950. That however, does not change the fact that you are better off than 98% of the American population. In fact you make close to 500% of what the median family in American makes. With close to 115M households in the US, you make 5 times or more than 57M households. You make more than 112.5M households. You are in the top 2M households out of 115M in America. Yes, despite your whining, you are rich. And you have a lower amount of disposable income because you made expensive choices, but choices that you have, that many do not have.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Middle class is a sociological term, not something legislated by Congress. And the 250k, 400k, or whatever, is a negotiated line in a particular tax bill, not a redefinition of a vague, relative term like "middle class" or "rich" as a precise term that fits the entire country. So WTF are we arguing about????

Yes yes yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Middle class is a sociological term, not something legislated by Congress. And the 250k, 400k, or whatever, is a negotiated line in a particular tax bill, not a redefinition of a vague, relative term like "middle class" or "rich" as a precise term that fits the entire country. So WTF are we arguing about????

TOTALLY AGREE.