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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't have time to wade through 30+ pages... In your opinion, what would constitute a true middle class? And what are the other classes out there?

I would broadly consider families where the higher income earner works in a professional job to be middle-class. I go by the old definitions of class though. In the majority of cases, upper class = inherited wealth. Some exceptions can be made for very high individual income earners like plastic surgeons, big time attorneys, CEO's, etc. But those of us who are of working age and who work for a wage, and if we stopped working we wouldn't be able to maintain our standard of living forever, are some type of "middle class," whether it's lower middle, middle, or upper middle.

And there are some people on this thread who disagree, and who maintain that it is a strict income definition (where income is either within a specific dollar amount or a certain percentage relative to the median). Some people also insist that it should be the national median, not local median, which would account somewhat for wage and cost-of-living differences.

People who think that "middle class" refers to working professionals with reasonably comfortable lives but who can't live off their wealth, and those who think it refers to people making between $50K and $125K a year, are never going to see eye-to-eye. Thus the 33 pages.

Right, but ... Do people really consider a working family making a HHI of $250k a year (especially if that amount is split between two adults vs just one) to be "upper class?" That's puzzling.

Apparently many people:

Anonymous wrote:Then that's an indication that you live in an affluent bubble. This area is so segregated by income that it's easy for people to work with, socialize with, and send their kids to school with people who live the same lifestyle that they do and come away with the impression that this way is the average way, when in fact they are far above average in income or lifestyle.

Anonymous wrote:The following things are luxuries:

1) A room just for the baby (middle class babies often share with their parents)

2) A home office (many middle class people have an office set up in the corner of their bedroom, or in the living room)

3) Being in NW (middle class people are more likely to live in Rockville, or Takoma Park, or Hyattsville)

Now, you can choose those things, of course, not saying you can't, but you have to recognize that if your budget is tight because you chose substantial luxuries that are usually reserved for wealthy people, that's not the same thing as having a budget that's tight because you can't afford the basics.

Anonymous wrote:If your house is in NW DC, Arlington, Potomac, Chevy Chase, Bethesda, etc and you feel like you're middle class, it's because you've lost perspective due to your neighbors. You might be poor man on the block but compared to everyone else you're basically rich.

Anonymous wrote:In Arlington, the middle class is around $75K to $150K, so upper middle class is around $125-150K.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the $250,000 doesn't get you very far" types can really relate to people in the actual middle class.

Anonymous wrote:The middle class cannot afford the things that cost you so much of your disposable income. If you can afford to own a SFH in a close-in suburb, then you are by definition upper class. The middle class rents, or buys condos or buys smaller townhouses or they live further out. You get to choose your form of childcare and the expensive church basement daycare is at least an option for you. The middle class could not afford that church basement daycare. When they live close in, they look for in-home daycares, or drastically time shift their schedules so that they can use part-time daycare which is what they can afford. Or they move further out and use a daycare that you would never trust. Because that's what they can afford in order to keep their lower paying job than yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't have time to wade through 30+ pages... In your opinion, what would constitute a true middle class? And what are the other classes out there?

I would broadly consider families where the higher income earner works in a professional job to be middle-class. I go by the old definitions of class though. In the majority of cases, upper class = inherited wealth. Some exceptions can be made for very high individual income earners like plastic surgeons, big time attorneys, CEO's, etc. But those of us who are of working age and who work for a wage, and if we stopped working we wouldn't be able to maintain our standard of living forever, are some type of "middle class," whether it's lower middle, middle, or upper middle.

And there are some people on this thread who disagree, and who maintain that it is a strict income definition (where income is either within a specific dollar amount or a certain percentage relative to the median). Some people also insist that it should be the national median, not local median, which would account somewhat for wage and cost-of-living differences.

People who think that "middle class" refers to working professionals with reasonably comfortable lives but who can't live off their wealth, and those who think it refers to people making between $50K and $125K a year, are never going to see eye-to-eye. Thus the 33 pages.

Right, but ... Do people really consider a working family making a HHI of $250k a year (especially if that amount is split between two adults vs just one) to be "upper class?" That's puzzling.

I think its upper middle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't have time to wade through 30+ pages... In your opinion, what would constitute a true middle class? And what are the other classes out there?

I would broadly consider families where the higher income earner works in a professional job to be middle-class. I go by the old definitions of class though. In the majority of cases, upper class = inherited wealth. Some exceptions can be made for very high individual income earners like plastic surgeons, big time attorneys, CEO's, etc. But those of us who are of working age and who work for a wage, and if we stopped working we wouldn't be able to maintain our standard of living forever, are some type of "middle class," whether it's lower middle, middle, or upper middle.

And there are some people on this thread who disagree, and who maintain that it is a strict income definition (where income is either within a specific dollar amount or a certain percentage relative to the median). Some people also insist that it should be the national median, not local median, which would account somewhat for wage and cost-of-living differences.

People who think that "middle class" refers to working professionals with reasonably comfortable lives but who can't live off their wealth, and those who think it refers to people making between $50K and $125K a year, are never going to see eye-to-eye. Thus the 33 pages.

Right, but ... Do people really consider a working family making a HHI of $250k a year (especially if that amount is split between two adults vs just one) to be "upper class?" That's puzzling.

I think its upper middle.

We are a dual income 250K family and if you think middle class is 3 tiers: lower, middle and upper, I barely consider us middle. We are not poor by any definition, but we certainly don't have a lot of luxuries except we do live close in, bit in a small, modestly renovated house, and between regular expenses and college and retirement savings there is not a lot of room. We do not live extravagantly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't have time to wade through 30+ pages... In your opinion, what would constitute a true middle class? And what are the other classes out there?

I would broadly consider families where the higher income earner works in a professional job to be middle-class. I go by the old definitions of class though. In the majority of cases, upper class = inherited wealth. Some exceptions can be made for very high individual income earners like plastic surgeons, big time attorneys, CEO's, etc. But those of us who are of working age and who work for a wage, and if we stopped working we wouldn't be able to maintain our standard of living forever, are some type of "middle class," whether it's lower middle, middle, or upper middle.

And there are some people on this thread who disagree, and who maintain that it is a strict income definition (where income is either within a specific dollar amount or a certain percentage relative to the median). Some people also insist that it should be the national median, not local median, which would account somewhat for wage and cost-of-living differences.

People who think that "middle class" refers to working professionals with reasonably comfortable lives but who can't live off their wealth, and those who think it refers to people making between $50K and $125K a year, are never going to see eye-to-eye. Thus the 33 pages.

Right, but ... Do people really consider a working family making a HHI of $250k a year (especially if that amount is split between two adults vs just one) to be "upper class?" That's puzzling.

I think its upper middle.

We are a dual income 250K family and if you think middle class is 3 tiers: lower, middle and upper, I barely consider us middle. We are not poor by any definition, but we certainly don't have a lot of luxuries except we do live close in, bit in a small, modestly renovated house, and between regular expenses and college and retirement savings there is not a lot of room. We do not live extravagantly.

Hmmm. You're pretty much describing our family except we're doing it on $150k. Althouhh renovations are being slowly made over time, we coukdnt get a house all fixed up. An extra $100k would go a long way!

You're upper middle, just deal with it.

[Anonymous]

I think we need a new name for the group that is above $200k and below $500k. Upper middle class doesn't seem to cut it. How about lower upper class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we need a new name for the group that is above $200k and below $500k. Upper middle class doesn't seem to cut it. How about lower upper class?

or working upper class?

[Anonymous]

Lol! It's a continuum, folks at the upper/lower ends of a category are never going to be happy. I'm not sure why it matters so much to you anyway- taxes, financial aid are based on a continuous scale anyway, it's not like $50k and $200k earners are treated exactly the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol! It's a continuum, folks at the upper/lower ends of a category are never going to be happy. I'm not sure why it matters so much to you anyway- taxes, financial aid are based on a continuous scale anyway, it's not like $50k and $200k earners are treated exactly the same.

If you compare the lifestyles of that in low cost areas and dc then yes .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't have time to wade through 30+ pages... In your opinion, what would constitute a true middle class? And what are the other classes out there?

I would broadly consider families where the higher income earner works in a professional job to be middle-class. I go by the old definitions of class though. In the majority of cases, upper class = inherited wealth. Some exceptions can be made for very high individual income earners like plastic surgeons, big time attorneys, CEO's, etc. But those of us who are of working age and who work for a wage, and if we stopped working we wouldn't be able to maintain our standard of living forever, are some type of "middle class," whether it's lower middle, middle, or upper middle.

And there are some people on this thread who disagree, and who maintain that it is a strict income definition (where income is either within a specific dollar amount or a certain percentage relative to the median). Some people also insist that it should be the national median, not local median, which would account somewhat for wage and cost-of-living differences.

People who think that "middle class" refers to working professionals with reasonably comfortable lives but who can't live off their wealth, and those who think it refers to people making between $50K and $125K a year, are never going to see eye-to-eye. Thus the 33 pages.

Right, but ... Do people really consider a working family making a HHI of $250k a year (especially if that amount is split between two adults vs just one) to be "upper class?" That's puzzling.

I think its upper middle.

We are a dual income 250K family and if you think middle class is 3 tiers: lower, middle and upper, I barely consider us middle. We are not poor by any definition, but we certainly don't have a lot of luxuries except we do live close in, bit in a small, modestly renovated house, and between regular expenses and college and retirement savings there is not a lot of room. We do not live extravagantly.

I'm in a dual income 160k household. We cannot afford that close-in home you are living in, even if it's not as renovated as you would like.

Instead, we live outside the beltway with the rest of the middle class that didn't buy pre-real estate boom or with family help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't have time to wade through 30+ pages... In your opinion, what would constitute a true middle class? And what are the other classes out there?

I would broadly consider families where the higher income earner works in a professional job to be middle-class. I go by the old definitions of class though. In the majority of cases, upper class = inherited wealth. Some exceptions can be made for very high individual income earners like plastic surgeons, big time attorneys, CEO's, etc. But those of us who are of working age and who work for a wage, and if we stopped working we wouldn't be able to maintain our standard of living forever, are some type of "middle class," whether it's lower middle, middle, or upper middle.

And there are some people on this thread who disagree, and who maintain that it is a strict income definition (where income is either within a specific dollar amount or a certain percentage relative to the median). Some people also insist that it should be the national median, not local median, which would account somewhat for wage and cost-of-living differences.

People who think that "middle class" refers to working professionals with reasonably comfortable lives but who can't live off their wealth, and those who think it refers to people making between $50K and $125K a year, are never going to see eye-to-eye. Thus the 33 pages.

Right, but ... Do people really consider a working family making a HHI of $250k a year (especially if that amount is split between two adults vs just one) to be "upper class?" That's puzzling.

I think its upper middle.

We are a dual income 250K family and if you think middle class is 3 tiers: lower, middle and upper, I barely consider us middle. We are not poor by any definition, but we certainly don't have a lot of luxuries except we do live close in, bit in a small, modestly renovated house, and between regular expenses and college and retirement savings there is not a lot of room. We do not live extravagantly.

You live in a close in single family home that has been renovated, and still put away money for college? Those things put you solidly in the upper middle class at the lowest.

I consider myself middle middle class (income right around $100K), my choices for housing would be renovated apartment close in, townhouse with a reasonable commute, unrenovated, or renovated through my own sweat, small single family home farther out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol! It's a continuum, folks at the upper/lower ends of a category are never going to be happy. I'm not sure why it matters so much to you anyway- taxes, financial aid are based on a continuous scale anyway, it's not like $50k and $200k earners are treated exactly the same.

If you compare the lifestyles of that in low cost areas and dc then yes .

Huh? Complete sentences please.

[Anonymous]

We live in a renovated row house in EoTP NW below florida ave. Our kid goes to Montessori but our "college savings" consists of the kid getting into the school where my wife teaches and getting free tuition. I work 80+ hours a week, the wife works 60+. We're the white collar serfs that serve the rich people. We're exhausted but realize we're lucky in the scheme of things. Such is modern life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we need a new name for the group that is above $200k and below $500k. Upper middle class doesn't seem to cut it. How about lower upper class?

or working upper class?

$125-$250 is upper middle, $250-500 is working upper. It's settled!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we need a new name for the group that is above $200k and below $500k. Upper middle class doesn't seem to cut it. How about lower upper class?

or working upper class?

$125-$250 is upper middle, $250-500 is working upper. It's settled!

Money magazine or some such proposed "HENRYs" -- high earners, not rich yet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we need a new name for the group that is above $200k and below $500k. Upper middle class doesn't seem to cut it. How about lower upper class?

or working upper class?

That's us - working upper class. HHI of about $430K but no intergenerational wealth and the HHI is spread 50/50 between the parents.