What is Middle Class....Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why anyone making $40K thinks anyone of either party is interested in their issues is beyond me.

Because that's the range in which most voters fall, and when you ignore the issues of the largest voting segment, you lose. How anyone doesn't get this behind ME!

But which party is actually addressing their issues?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why anyone making $40K thinks anyone of either party is interested in their issues is beyond me.

Because that's the range in which most voters fall, and when you ignore the issues of the largest voting segment, you lose. How anyone doesn't get this behind ME!

But which party is actually addressing their issues?

Neither seem to be helping. However Republicans are actually trying to make it worse for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More about social class not being related to income:

https://hbr.org/2017/05/research-how-you-feel-about-individualism-is-influenced-by-your-social-class

Thanks for sharing this article. But while I admit I haven't looked at the underlying research, I feel like this leaves out some of the major elements that confound these types of conversation in the US: race and ethnicity. By income and education, I was raised in a UC/UMC household. But my parents are Indian immigrants, where interconnectedness is deeply ingrained in the culture. That interconnectedness is further enforced in immigrant communities who often feel the desire to "stick together" even when they have many of the tools for individualized success. It's not about money or status, it's also about being a minority at any level.

A specific counter-example to the article where they talk about the Morgan Stanley job posting that looked for a "self-starter" as being a class issue is also that research suggests a focus on individual success and competition is also a gender issue. Women are more likely to choose to work at and feel comfortable in work places that emphasize teamwork, regardless of their social class.

It's simply not possible to talk about SES in the US without also addressing race, immigration status, and ethnicity. The US is unique in the world for having these factors matter in such an integral way, and that's a great thing!

[Anonymous]

I'd love to see this thread featured on major media outlets, and see how people outside the D.C. area would react. Not that D.C. cares about what other people think. This thread is depressing on so many levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More about social class not being related to income:

https://hbr.org/2017/05/research-how-you-feel-about-individualism-is-influenced-by-your-social-class

Thanks for sharing this article. But while I admit I haven't looked at the underlying research, I feel like this leaves out some of the major elements that confound these types of conversation in the US: race and ethnicity. By income and education, I was raised in a UC/UMC household. But my parents are Indian immigrants, where interconnectedness is deeply ingrained in the culture. That interconnectedness is further enforced in immigrant communities who often feel the desire to "stick together" even when they have many of the tools for individualized success. It's not about money or status, it's also about being a minority at any level.

A specific counter-example to the article where they talk about the Morgan Stanley job posting that looked for a "self-starter" as being a class issue is also that research suggests a focus on individual success and competition is also a gender issue. Women are more likely to choose to work at and feel comfortable in work places that emphasize teamwork, regardless of their social class.

It's simply not possible to talk about SES in the US without also addressing race, immigration status, and ethnicity. The US is unique in the world for having these factors matter in such an integral way, and that's a great thing!

In other words, you don't have a lot of Indian women in high powered jobs like hedge funds or litigation because they would need to be individual achievers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to see this thread featured on major media outlets, and see how people outside the D.C. area would react. Not that D.C. cares about what other people think. This thread is depressing on so many levels.

I know DC is a bubble. That's why I like it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to see this thread featured on major media outlets, and see how people outside the D.C. area would react. Not that D.C. cares about what other people think. This thread is depressing on so many levels.

I know DC is a bubble. That's why I like it!

PP here -- I have a love-hate relationship with this place. One thing that drives me nuts is that the bubble is full of mirrors turned on itself, and people here really lose touch with reality, yet they think like they're like any average American OR superior to the average American. Not sure what's worse. Either way it is driving up resentment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to see this thread featured on major media outlets, and see how people outside the D.C. area would react. Not that D.C. cares about what other people think. This thread is depressing on so many levels.

I know DC is a bubble. That's why I like it!

PP here -- I have a love-hate relationship with this place. One thing that drives me nuts is that the bubble is full of mirrors turned on itself, and people here really lose touch with reality, yet they think like they're like any average American OR superior to the average American. Not sure what's worse. Either way it is driving up resentment.

So we should strive to be average?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to see this thread featured on major media outlets, and see how people outside the D.C. area would react. Not that D.C. cares about what other people think. This thread is depressing on so many levels.

I know DC is a bubble. That's why I like it!

PP here -- I have a love-hate relationship with this place. One thing that drives me nuts is that the bubble is full of mirrors turned on itself, and people here really lose touch with reality, yet they think like they're like any average American OR superior to the average American. Not sure what's worse. Either way it is driving up resentment.

So we should strive to be average?

No, keep your nose in the air, and touting how hard your life is. I'm sure there are some other organizations that enjoy showing us bemoan our impoverished leading BMWs, living in $1M+ house, eating out, traveling the world while our children do community service to build a resume, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You get extremely cheap rent for middle income housing. As in $1000 less/month. And in some buildings for a family of 4 the income limits are above $200k/year.

Link showing under what circumstances a family earning $200,000 gets housing subsidies?

Are you people so lazy and incompetent you can't actually look this up for yourselves? No wonder you all languish in mediocrity.

http://www.nychdc.com/pages/MI_Manhattan.html

Well, aren't you a nice one?

Anyway, the middle-income apartments I checked all seem to top out at $134,000. I see nowhere where a couple earning $200,000 get taxpayer assistance.

"Couple" is not the same thing as "family of four". We'll add illiteracy to the list of shortcomings.

I saw it said "family of four," but I imagine the the kiddos aren't contributing to the $200,000. Besides, it says $134,000 for a family of four. Show me where a family earning $200,000 is sucking off taxpayers, and I'll have an interesting editorial to submit.

(And no need for me to outline your shortcomings. Anyone reading your lovely posts already has an idea.)

http://www.nychdc.com/content/pdf/ProjectAdvertisements/Beacon%20Mews.pdf

Right hand side column dear. "Income range" means "amount of income you can have and still qualify."

That was a different link this time, dear. You linked to something else earlier.

Still....that's absolutely inexcusable! Families earning $214,000 should not be taking taxpayer funds. No wonder the city is broke. That liberal mayor needs to have his head examined.

Actually, that second link is the very first link listed in the first link I posted. The one that says "advertisement." The first page is a list of buildings you see, and from that list you can access specific buildings (which is what that second link is).

I hope for your sake you're a trophy wife, because your brains are not going to get you far.

+1

Agreed that OP is a blithering idiot. It doesn't take much in the way of brains or competence to earn 100k/year around DC, apparently.

+2. OP has absolutely no class...her income doesn't even matter at this point. She sounds more like someone making 30k and living in a trailer home. Perhaps she does.

You rude snobs calling the professional earning $100,000 a "blithering idiot" and "trailer trash" should have a look at the other thread that shows a college-educated earner making $100,000 is in the top 15% of all college graduates (the majority of whom love in cities where COL is high).

You snobs are why average earners making $40,000 rejected Democrats - which was, I believe, the point OP was making. Talk about idiots - you're too stupid to understand that.

Oh dear, more blithering.

If this thread shows anything, it's that there are people like the OP ^^^ making $100k that are complete imbeciles. Hey OP, you should give your job to someone with a brain and the ability to think critically. And you know, stop pretending like you're a different poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You get extremely cheap rent for middle income housing. As in $1000 less/month. And in some buildings for a family of 4 the income limits are above $200k/year.

Link showing under what circumstances a family earning $200,000 gets housing subsidies?

Are you people so lazy and incompetent you can't actually look this up for yourselves? No wonder you all languish in mediocrity.

http://www.nychdc.com/pages/MI_Manhattan.html

Well, aren't you a nice one?

Anyway, the middle-income apartments I checked all seem to top out at $134,000. I see nowhere where a couple earning $200,000 get taxpayer assistance.

"Couple" is not the same thing as "family of four". We'll add illiteracy to the list of shortcomings.

I saw it said "family of four," but I imagine the the kiddos aren't contributing to the $200,000. Besides, it says $134,000 for a family of four. Show me where a family earning $200,000 is sucking off taxpayers, and I'll have an interesting editorial to submit.

(And no need for me to outline your shortcomings. Anyone reading your lovely posts already has an idea.)

http://www.nychdc.com/content/pdf/ProjectAdvertisements/Beacon%20Mews.pdf

Right hand side column dear. "Income range" means "amount of income you can have and still qualify."

That was a different link this time, dear. You linked to something else earlier.

Still....that's absolutely inexcusable! Families earning $214,000 should not be taking taxpayer funds. No wonder the city is broke. That liberal mayor needs to have his head examined.

Actually, that second link is the very first link listed in the first link I posted. The one that says "advertisement." The first page is a list of buildings you see, and from that list you can access specific buildings (which is what that second link is).

I hope for your sake you're a trophy wife, because your brains are not going to get you far.

+1

Agreed that OP is a blithering idiot. It doesn't take much in the way of brains or competence to earn 100k/year around DC, apparently.

+2. OP has absolutely no class...her income doesn't even matter at this point. She sounds more like someone making 30k and living in a trailer home. Perhaps she does.

You rude snobs calling the professional earning $100,000 a "blithering idiot" and "trailer trash" should have a look at the other thread that shows a college-educated earner making $100,000 is in the top 15% of all college graduates (the majority of whom love in cities where COL is high).

You snobs are why average earners making $40,000 rejected Democrats - which was, I believe, the point OP was making. Talk about idiots - you're too stupid to understand that.

Oh dear, more blithering.

If this thread shows anything, it's that there are people like the OP ^^^ making $100k that are complete imbeciles. Hey OP, you should give your job to someone with a brain and the ability to think critically. And you know, stop pretending like you're a different poster.

*slow clap*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to see this thread featured on major media outlets, and see how people outside the D.C. area would react. Not that D.C. cares about what other people think. This thread is depressing on so many levels.

I know DC is a bubble. That's why I like it!

PP here -- I have a love-hate relationship with this place. One thing that drives me nuts is that the bubble is full of mirrors turned on itself, and people here really lose touch with reality, yet they think like they're like any average American OR superior to the average American. Not sure what's worse. Either way it is driving up resentment.

So we should strive to be average?

No, keep your nose in the air, and touting how hard your life is. I'm sure there are some other organizations that enjoy showing us bemoan our impoverished leading BMWs, living in $1M+ house, eating out, traveling the world while our children do community service to build a resume, etc.

Oh you misunderstand. I don't have a hard life at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You get extremely cheap rent for middle income housing. As in $1000 less/month. And in some buildings for a family of 4 the income limits are above $200k/year.

Link showing under what circumstances a family earning $200,000 gets housing subsidies?

Are you people so lazy and incompetent you can't actually look this up for yourselves? No wonder you all languish in mediocrity.

http://www.nychdc.com/pages/MI_Manhattan.html

Well, aren't you a nice one?

Anyway, the middle-income apartments I checked all seem to top out at $134,000. I see nowhere where a couple earning $200,000 get taxpayer assistance.

"Couple" is not the same thing as "family of four". We'll add illiteracy to the list of shortcomings.

I saw it said "family of four," but I imagine the the kiddos aren't contributing to the $200,000. Besides, it says $134,000 for a family of four. Show me where a family earning $200,000 is sucking off taxpayers, and I'll have an interesting editorial to submit.

(And no need for me to outline your shortcomings. Anyone reading your lovely posts already has an idea.)

http://www.nychdc.com/content/pdf/ProjectAdvertisements/Beacon%20Mews.pdf

Right hand side column dear. "Income range" means "amount of income you can have and still qualify."

That was a different link this time, dear. You linked to something else earlier.

Still....that's absolutely inexcusable! Families earning $214,000 should not be taking taxpayer funds. No wonder the city is broke. That liberal mayor needs to have his head examined.

Actually, that second link is the very first link listed in the first link I posted. The one that says "advertisement." The first page is a list of buildings you see, and from that list you can access specific buildings (which is what that second link is).

I hope for your sake you're a trophy wife, because your brains are not going to get you far.

+1

Agreed that OP is a blithering idiot. It doesn't take much in the way of brains or competence to earn 100k/year around DC, apparently.

+2. OP has absolutely no class...her income doesn't even matter at this point. She sounds more like someone making 30k and living in a trailer home. Perhaps she does.

You rude snobs calling the professional earning $100,000 a "blithering idiot" and "trailer trash" should have a look at the other thread that shows a college-educated earner making $100,000 is in the top 15% of all college graduates (the majority of whom love in cities where COL is high).

You snobs are why average earners making $40,000 rejected Democrats - which was, I believe, the point OP was making. Talk about idiots - you're too stupid to understand that.

Oh dear, more blithering.

If this thread shows anything, it's that there are people like the OP ^^^ making $100k that are complete imbeciles. Hey OP, you should give your job to someone with a brain and the ability to think critically. And you know, stop pretending like you're a different poster.

*slow clap*

If anything, it shows that there are people so out of touch with reality that that enjoy making fun of a professional with a six-figure income. I doubt the OP has been back in a while.

[Anonymous]

This thread helps explain how Trump won so handily. Divided we fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread helps explain how Trump won so handily. Divided we fall.

?? He lost the popular vote and won by <1% in the three states necessary to get the electoral college. The country is divided, but the first part of your sentence (and your theory) aren't true.