Can we stop referring to households making $200 or 300K a year as "middle class"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the choice argument only works if these families could move to lower cost of living areas and still make that much. That usually isn't the case.

The vast majority of families living in expensive DC, Bethesda, Chevy Chase or Arlington neighborhoods and complaining about cost of living, could move to Silver Spring, or PG County, or Burke and continue to work at the same jobs, and have the same income.

The PP was right. Short commutes, high scoring public schools, "walkable communities", these are luxuries. There's nothing wrong with wanting to have them, but they're expensive luxuries. If you're paying for them, and not making major sacrifices elsewhere, you probably aren't middle class.

+1

--signed, HHI $220k living in Arlington, definitely not living high on the hog (small house, old cars) but fully cognizant of the luxuries we enjoy by living here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Plenty of people with 200k HHI can't afford to live in these areas with "amenities" due to factors like student loans, child care, and having to break into the real estate market post-bubble. A 200k household with $500/month in student loans and two kids in daycare and a first home bought post-2011 or so is probably much more "middle class" than a household with the same income, no loans, a house bought pre-bubble, and kids who are out of daycare.

That's not to say that the first household won't eventually break into upper middle class, but I don't think it's entirely unreasonable that younger households feel strapped on that income.

DH and I both make about 100k, which is decent for this area, but not anything unusual. If we moved to Boise, ID we'd probably make decent salaries for Idaho, but I doubt we'd be rich. Middle class is all relative based on the metro area you live in and the extent of your school debt/how long ago you bought your first home.

We make close to $200K with $400/month in student loans, bought in early 2012, two kids in daycare. I wouldn't ever say that we are "middle class," but if you look at our lifestyle, it looks pretty middle-class (small old house, $20-$25k cars that are two and seven years old, no fancy furniture, no gym or pool memberships, minimal restaurant eating, K-12 public schools). We do max out one 401(k) and two Roths, which I think would be tough on a truly middle-class income.

[Anonymous]

I think that's incredibly depressing, although accurate for this area. Luxuries should be things like affording a cleaning service, driving a Lexus, taking a vacation to Europe every summer, owning a beach house, etc. Being able to send your kids to a good school (not necessarily a 10 on great schools, but one with decent test scores and not a high percentage of ESOL students) and living within 30 minutes of your job shouldn't be just for the upper middle class.


I agree with you 100%. I grew up in a mid-sized town and "luxuries" like good schools and decent commutes were normal amenities for the middle class. There are benefits to living in a place like DC, for example a lot of jobs and exposure to different cultures, but people in the middle class here do not live as well as people in the middle class in other, less expensive areas.

I hear this a lot on this website. I have lived in five different cities in my life--DC, one in the midwest, two on the West Coast, and one in Texas. In every one of these cities, the areas that had short commutes that also were zoned for what were considered good schools have been expensive--at least relative to the cost of the rest of the city. Of course the cost of living varies--but so do the wages.

My in-laws live in a rural area. They consider themselves middle class--by the standards of this website they would be considered lower income, but by the standards of median income/income percentile, they are solidly in the middle of the income distribution. They didn't really think about what schools are "good" or not. They just sent DH and his sisters to the school they were zoned for. It isn't like there is a whole lot of choice in rural areas. Parents don't pour over greatschools ratings or buy real estate based on school zones--it's just not something that crosses people's mind. My SIL lives in another town about an hour away from where they grew up, and also takes this approach to her kids' schools.

Where exactly are these areas where people "live so much better?"

[Anonymous]

What state are talking about pp?

[Anonymous]

I think the median household income of DCUM posters is about the same as that of Wall Street Journal readers.

http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/those_poor_300000_households_i.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:200k and can't afford a house I'd actually want to live in. I consider us solidly middle class.

And I expect you are typical of people who think they're middle class when they are clearly not. It's not enough to own a home, you have to own the perfect home, with at least one more bedroom than you need, a kitchen updated in the last 5 years to your exacting tastes, the right location, the right schools, etc etc etc.

Middle class means you compromise and you do without. Kids share a bedroom. The kitchen is 15 years old or more. The floors are carpeted, and the bathrooms look like your grandmas. And you live with that because you have other financial priorities - and you simply can't afford to renovate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK. As soon as our friends on the left stop taxing households that make $!00K or $!50K as the "wealthy."

Your tax rates are the lowest they've been in more than three decades. They are even lower than when St. Ronald Reagan was in office. Educate thyself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the choice argument only works if these families could move to lower cost of living areas and still make that much. That usually isn't the case.

The vast majority of families living in expensive DC, Bethesda, Chevy Chase or Arlington neighborhoods and complaining about cost of living, could move to Silver Spring, or PG County, or Burke and continue to work at the same jobs, and have the same income.

The PP was right. Short commutes, high scoring public schools, "walkable communities", these are luxuries. There's nothing wrong with wanting to have them, but they're expensive luxuries. If you're paying for them, and not making major sacrifices elsewhere, you probably aren't middle class.

Excellent points! Quite a few posters here don't seem to have common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:200k and can't afford a house I'd actually want to live in. I consider us solidly middle class.

And I expect you are typical of people who think they're middle class when they are clearly not. It's not enough to own a home, you have to own the perfect home, with at least one more bedroom than you need, a kitchen updated in the last 5 years to your exacting tastes, the right location, the right schools, etc etc etc.

Middle class means you compromise and you do without. Kids share a bedroom. The kitchen is 15 years old or more. The floors are carpeted, and the bathrooms look like your grandmas. And you live with that because you have other financial priorities - and you simply can't afford to renovate.

Right. If you ever watch the TV show The Middle, that family is living the way most of the middle class in the US lives. The house, the furniture, the clothes they wear: they are all much closer to what most of the US would recognize as middle class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK. As soon as our friends on the left stop taxing households that make $!00K or $!50K as the "wealthy."

As someone who makes 160K, I can assure you 1) there are few left of me, and 2) I do not pay a lot of federal taxes....In 2013, I paid 11% in federal income tax....AGI was 155K...37K deductions, 11K exemptions...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, in NW DC it is middle class. That's reality.

You're deluded.

I think she's right. I don't know anyone here who doesn't make at least $200k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, in NW DC it is middle class. That's reality.

You're deluded.

I think she's right. I don't know anyone here who doesn't make at least $200k.

Ridiculous. Just because you live with other rich people, only socialize with rich people, and send your kids to schools with other rich people does not make you middle class. People of similar incomes tend to live near one another, but being near the median for your neighborhood of rich people doesn't change that you are not middle class. How is that so hard for a person that makes so much money (or married someone whoakes that much money) to understand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think that's incredibly depressing, although accurate for this area. Luxuries should be things like affording a cleaning service, driving a Lexus, taking a vacation to Europe every summer, owning a beach house, etc. Being able to send your kids to a good school (not necessarily a 10 on great schools, but one with decent test scores and not a high percentage of ESOL students) and living within 30 minutes of your job shouldn't be just for the upper middle class.


I agree with you 100%. I grew up in a mid-sized town and "luxuries" like good schools and decent commutes were normal amenities for the middle class. There are benefits to living in a place like DC, for example a lot of jobs and exposure to different cultures, but people in the middle class here do not live as well as people in the middle class in other, less expensive areas.

I hear this a lot on this website. I have lived in five different cities in my life--DC, one in the midwest, two on the West Coast, and one in Texas. In every one of these cities, the areas that had short commutes that also were zoned for what were considered good schools have been expensive--at least relative to the cost of the rest of the city. Of course the cost of living varies--but so do the wages.

My in-laws live in a rural area. They consider themselves middle class--by the standards of this website they would be considered lower income, but by the standards of median income/income percentile, they are solidly in the middle of the income distribution. They didn't really think about what schools are "good" or not. They just sent DH and his sisters to the school they were zoned for. It isn't like there is a whole lot of choice in rural areas. Parents don't pour over greatschools ratings or buy real estate based on school zones--it's just not something that crosses people's mind. My SIL lives in another town about an hour away from where they grew up, and also takes this approach to her kids' schools.

Where exactly are these areas where people "live so much better?"

I'm the PP who agreed 100% with the other PP. I grew up in Richmond (technically Henrico) and went to public school. We had a much bigger and nicer house (in a nicer neighborhood) than I have here in DC even though my husband and I make double what my parents make. I'm not saying you should feel sorry for me or anything, just that money simply doesn't go as far here. It's a trade off - many people who live here wouldn't want to live in Richmond (though it's a nice place IMO), so you pay more but get different benefits like I mentioned in my PP.

So I think the definition of what makes middle class differs by area. What is middle class? Is it being able to save a minimal amount, not live paycheck to paycheck all of the time? I think the definition is less about absolute numbers and more on your lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the choice argument only works if these families could move to lower cost of living areas and still make that much. That usually isn't the case.

The vast majority of families living in expensive DC, Bethesda, Chevy Chase or Arlington neighborhoods and complaining about cost of living, could move to Silver Spring, or PG County, or Burke and continue to work at the same jobs, and have the same income.

The PP was right. Short commutes, high scoring public schools, "walkable communities", these are luxuries. There's nothing wrong with wanting to have them, but they're expensive luxuries. If you're paying for them, and not making major sacrifices elsewhere, you probably aren't middle class.

By the same token, anyone making $50k a year could move to the Appalachia and become king of the hill there. Does that mean 50k is not middle class?

It is all relative.

[Anonymous]

That is an amazingly stupid article. "For the love of all that is good...?" Right there you know you are reading an idiot. Standard table show that the middle class varies form place to place b/c of cost of living. How hard is that to understand? When every home in the neighborhood cost north of $1M ( many neighbors in the DC area) for a simple 4 bdrm older home, the cost of college is $40K +, insurance for self employed workers is sky high, cars cost plenty also, daycare (shocking high to me), self pay retirement there goes that $200K into simple expenses. And if your job depends on working for a company based in DC -- you are stuck here. So whatever -- if you lived in some rural flyover state, you would be rich, but where's the job?