Anonymous wrote:He didn't say middle class was $200K to $250k.

He said that the middle class was $200 to $250K and less. Which means that the very top of middle class is either $200K or $250K. So that would make a family with a HHI of $210K the very high side of middle class, and maybe not even in the middle class.

My family's HHI is almost exactly $200K, and that is consistent with my view. We are very upper middle class or maybe even rich.

Maybe that it literally true, but "upper middle class" is a very different class from the middle class.

Anonymous wrote:To be completely fair to Romney, the Democrats have been defining middle class in the same range for about 6 or 7 years now, ever since they began indexing the Alternative Minimum Tax for inflation when they were in charge of Congress.

Stop being logical.

He didn't say middle class was $200K to $250k.

He said that the middle class was $200 to $250K and less. Which means that the very top of middle class is either $200K or $250K. So that would make a family with a HHI of $210K the very high side of middle class, and maybe not even in the middle class.

My family's HHI is almost exactly $200K, and that is consistent with my view. We are very upper middle class or maybe even rich.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I completely agree, especially in our area and north.

In our area to be "rich" (and above middle class) the 1% begins at income of $527,000

To be considered part of the 1 percent in this area, it takes a household income far above the national average of $387,000.

The gateway for the region is $527,000. In the District, the top 1 percent of households bring in at least $617,000; in Montgomery County, more than $606,000; and in Fairfax County, $532,000,


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/joining-washingtons-one-percenters-takes-more-than-the-us-average/2012/04/21/gIQAJ6YvXT_story.html

So now we're defining middle class as everyone below the top 1% of income, adjusted for location?

93th percentile is the new median, haven't you heard!

Anonymous wrote:I completely agree, especially in our area and north.

In our area to be "rich" (and above middle class) the 1% begins at income of $527,000

To be considered part of the 1 percent in this area, it takes a household income far above the national average of $387,000.

The gateway for the region is $527,000. In the District, the top 1 percent of households bring in at least $617,000; in Montgomery County, more than $606,000; and in Fairfax County, $532,000,


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/joining-washingtons-one-percenters-takes-more-than-the-us-average/2012/04/21/gIQAJ6YvXT_story.html

So now we're defining middle class as everyone below the top 1% of income, adjusted for location?

To be completely fair to Romney, the Democrats have been defining middle class in the same range for about 6 or 7 years now, ever since they began indexing the Alternative Minimum Tax for inflation when they were in charge of Congress.

Let me get this straight, if the poverty level is $25k a year, and the rich level (1%) is $387k.

Then Romney is right $25k to $387k is middle class.

This is of course not adjusted for COL. Why can't taxes be adjusted for COL just like the GS salary schedule?

Anonymous wrote:An average salary would be that of a teacher so lets say 2 married teachers would make about 180k a year on average, that's starting middle class.

No. Two people making 35K on average are middle class. A family living on one teacher's salary is middle class. Two teachers with enough seniority to make $90K apiece are at the upper end of middle class.

Anonymous wrote:I completely agree, especially in our area and north.

In our area to be "rich" (and above middle class) the 1% begins at income of $527,000

To be considered part of the 1 percent in this area, it takes a household income far above the national average of $387,000.

The gateway for the region is $527,000. In the District, the top 1 percent of households bring in at least $617,000; in Montgomery County, more than $606,000; and in Fairfax County, $532,000,


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/joining-washingtons-one-percenters-takes-more-than-the-us-average/2012/04/21/gIQAJ6YvXT_story.html

Do you think the logical dividing line for the term "middle class" should be the 99th percentile???? Regardless of where we live, 250K is not middle class. At 250K you are not clipping coupons and wondering how you will get your car fixed or whether your kid really needs braces. You aren't saying no to your kid doing gymnastics. You are not wondering when you can move out of a neighborhood that is crime ridden. Your vacation is not always a car trip and you stay at the motel 6. You do not have to fix the clothes you put holes in. Your kids have been to a real restaurant for something other than a special occasion.

We have forgotten what middle class really is. We look up and see someone with a more exotic life than ours and so we assume we are just average Joe. We aren't. We are way above average Joe at that income, and a higher mortgage does not erase that enormous gap.

Anonymous wrote:An average salary would be that of a teacher so lets say 2 married teachers would make about 180k a year on average, that's starting middle class.

Since when do teachers make 90k? I have a PhD and make 40k.

An average salary would be that of a teacher so lets say 2 married teachers would make about 180k a year on average, that's starting middle class.

Anonymous wrote:I completely agree, especially in our area and north.

In our area to be "rich" (and above middle class) the 1% begins at income of $527,000

To be considered part of the 1 percent in this area, it takes a household income far above the national average of $387,000.

The gateway for the region is $527,000. In the District, the top 1 percent of households bring in at least $617,000; in Montgomery County, more than $606,000; and in Fairfax County, $532,000,


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/joining-washingtons-one-percenters-takes-more-than-the-us-average/2012/04/21/gIQAJ6YvXT_story.html

So, according to you, 1% are rich and 99% are middle class. Who knew!

Well, just this morning in the off-topic somebody described her 300k HHI as "average for this area". So, apparently there are all these big earners around who feel like they are middle class, just like me. I guess I feel like.. almost flattered?

I completely agree, especially in our area and north.

In our area to be "rich" (and above middle class) the 1% begins at income of $527,000

To be considered part of the 1 percent in this area, it takes a household income far above the national average of $387,000.

The gateway for the region is $527,000. In the District, the top 1 percent of households bring in at least $617,000; in Montgomery County, more than $606,000; and in Fairfax County, $532,000,


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/joining-washingtons-one-percenters-takes-more-than-the-us-average/2012/04/21/gIQAJ6YvXT_story.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/mitt-romneys-definition-of-the-middle-class-is-pretty-weird-in-1-graph/262402/

Mitt Romney's Definition of the Middle Class Is Pretty Weird—in 1 Graph
By Derek Thompson

inShare Sep 14 2012, 1:06 PM ET 20

In an interview with ABC, Mitt Romney offered his definition of the middle class. "Middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less," he said.*

Who knows what "middle class" really means. It's more of a feeling than a statistical definition. But as a matter of arithmetic, it doesn't make much sense to think of people earning $200,000 as being in the middle of anything, except the top decile of earners. Using data from the Tax Policy Center 2012 projected distribution, here's a look at the share of American tax units that make less than $200,000. The big blue slice is Romney's definition of middle class, which in all fairness to him, is more or less shared by the White House.

There are lots of ways to measure household income, like market income before taxes or total income after taxes and government transfers, and so on. It doesn't make much of a difference. If you make $200,000, you are, essentially, the 5%. A $200,000 salary will go a lot further in North Dakota than in Manhattan, of course, but it doesn't change the overall distribution.

You could argue that Romney's middle class definition shows that he doesn't understand average people in a country where the typical household earns about $50,000. Or you could argue that Romney's broad definition of middle income is harmless because it just means his promises to the "middle class" extend up to $250,000. I'm not arguing either point. But to call $200,000 "middle income" begs the question: Middle of what, exactly?

*Extremely fair point raised by the first commenter: The president's tax plan, which has been described as preserving tax cuts "for the middle class," also uses the $200,000/$250,000 cutoff. Although I haven't seen the president refer to people making $200,000 as "middle class" or "middle income," but it is not unreasonable to argue that his policy makes the point implicitly.