Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm UMC because of my SES, particularly my educational level, not because of my income or net worth.

Grey Gardens types. You see these adjunct professors loading up their 30-year-old Volvos and Saabs outside of Trader Joe's. They don't have a pot to piss in, but they're desperate to think of themselves as UMC.

I'm a lawyer, third generation. Both my parents, and 3 of my 4 grandparents, graduated from college. I'm married to another lawyer. My husband and I, and all of our children, attended or attend top universities. We haven't been farmers for four generations. We do have a pot to piss in - about $7.5 million net worth, just over $400,000 in HHI - but the money is not the point.

I feel bad for the full-time adjuncts. But most tenure-line profs have it pretty good. The older ones have locked benefits, pensions, and job security (literally until you become senile).

They are almost universally upper-middle-class. And yes they tend to drive 20-year old volvos. But that is often since they don't give a shit. (I do a 30-year old BMW myself) Basically all of AU park 15 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm UMC because of my SES, particularly my educational level, not because of my income or net worth.

Grey Gardens types. You see these adjunct professors loading up their 30-year-old Volvos and Saabs outside of Trader Joe's. They don't have a pot to piss in, but they're desperate to think of themselves as UMC.

I'm a lawyer, third generation. Both my parents, and 3 of my 4 grandparents, graduated from college. I'm married to another lawyer. My husband and I, and all of our children, attended or attend top universities. We haven't been farmers for four generations. We do have a pot to piss in - about $7.5 million net worth, just over $400,000 in HHI - but the money is not the point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know honestly. I admit upfront I am in the "I have a public service job but my father's estate pays for private schools and will pay for private college and graduate school for my kids" bucket.

will it also pay for your grandkids' private schooling, college, and grad schools, or will your kids have to face the fact that you let the gravy train dry up, and if they want to provide their kids the same standard of living, they're on their own?

Please. DP but do you hear yourself? I fully expect that if my kids want my standard of living, then they will have to work hard for it. Just like their parents do and their grandparents did. We've already given them a loving and supportive household, two smart parents with good work ethics, legacies at Ivy league and other top 20 institutions, savings that will fund whichever public or private college they get into and potentially giving them a nice estate (subject to whatever tax regime they find themselves in when we die) but it won't be until they've achieved things on their own. They're starting off better than all but 2-3% of households in this country.

I have several downwardly mobile relatives (i.e., mediocre white guys) that have been given all the things you described - private prep schools, private college, etc. and haven't amounted to anything. In my own job, I can spot these types a mile away. It's the prep school guy from Lehigh or Middlebury or some other middling college trading on his high school's reputation. Somewhat lazy and entitled but loves talking about his former lacrosse/crew/squash/etc. glory days. They're your future white rhinos -- endangered by changing demographics and expectations.

So we should scratch Lehigh and Middlebury from the college search list?

At least in finance circles, these colleges (along with schools like Washington and Lee, College of Charleston, Trinity College (CN)) are all viewed as second rate, "finishing" schools primarily for rich kids that either weren't sufficiently talented or had the work ethic to excel and get into better schools. But if you're into sales and other "glad handing"/relationship services like private wealth management, P&C insurance, certain sales and trading, brokerage (mortgage, commercial and residential real estate, etc.) or other front office type of services, then there still is a market for your services. I expect that this is where the most disruption will occur over the next few decades as younger generations simply don't care who they interact with. These same mediocre white guys tend to struggle when it comes to things like litigation and M&A, which require excellent analytical skills and attention to detail.

You sound like such an uppity turd

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know honestly. I admit upfront I am in the "I have a public service job but my father's estate pays for private schools and will pay for private college and graduate school for my kids" bucket.

will it also pay for your grandkids' private schooling, college, and grad schools, or will your kids have to face the fact that you let the gravy train dry up, and if they want to provide their kids the same standard of living, they're on their own?

Please. DP but do you hear yourself? I fully expect that if my kids want my standard of living, then they will have to work hard for it. Just like their parents do and their grandparents did. We've already given them a loving and supportive household, two smart parents with good work ethics, legacies at Ivy league and other top 20 institutions, savings that will fund whichever public or private college they get into and potentially giving them a nice estate (subject to whatever tax regime they find themselves in when we die) but it won't be until they've achieved things on their own. They're starting off better than all but 2-3% of households in this country.

I have several downwardly mobile relatives (i.e., mediocre white guys) that have been given all the things you described - private prep schools, private college, etc. and haven't amounted to anything. In my own job, I can spot these types a mile away. It's the prep school guy from Lehigh or Middlebury or some other middling college trading on his high school's reputation. Somewhat lazy and entitled but loves talking about his former lacrosse/crew/squash/etc. glory days. They're your future white rhinos -- endangered by changing demographics and expectations.

So we should scratch Lehigh and Middlebury from the college search list?

At least in finance circles, these colleges (along with schools like Washington and Lee, College of Charleston, Trinity College (CN)) are all viewed as second rate, "finishing" schools primarily for rich kids that either weren't sufficiently talented or had the work ethic to excel and get into better schools. But if you're into sales and other "glad handing"/relationship services like private wealth management, P&C insurance, certain sales and trading, brokerage (mortgage, commercial and residential real estate, etc.) or other front office type of services, then there still is a market for your services. I expect that this is where the most disruption will occur over the next few decades as younger generations simply don't care who they interact with. These same mediocre white guys tend to struggle when it comes to things like litigation and M&A, which require excellent analytical skills and attention to detail.

Anonymous wrote:You people are insane. Per this article, to be in the top 5% of earners in the DC area, you need to make over $250k a year:

https://statisticalatlas.com/state/District-of-Columbia/Household-Income

If you are in the TOP 5% OF EARNERS you are by definition NOT IN THE MIDDLE. DUH. You are also not in the upper middle. YOU ARE AT THE TOP. YOU ARE RICH. Yes, we do, as a society, tend to take a wide view of middle, but anyone claiming to be middle class, or upper middle class, who is making more than $250k a year, is incredibly out of step with reality.

The exact cutoff we can discuss. The top 20% cutoff is $163k. I can see an argument for that being "upper middle class." This doesn't breakdown the top 10%, but I'm guessing it's around $200k. That's a reasonable cutoff. Clearly people can disagree here, and there's nuance.

But if you're above $250k and you are claiming upper middle class, I judge you HARD. Own it. You're rich.

Anonymous wrote:Does net worth include home value?

Anonymous wrote:We consider ourselves lower upper middle class.
375 HHI
3 M in savings
1 kid

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm UMC because of my SES, particularly my educational level, not because of my income or net worth.

Grey Gardens types. You see these adjunct professors loading up their 30-year-old Volvos and Saabs outside of Trader Joe's. They don't have a pot to piss in, but they're desperate to think of themselves as UMC.

I'm a lawyer, third generation. Both my parents, and 3 of my 4 grandparents, graduated from college. I'm married to another lawyer. My husband and I, and all of our children, attended or attend top universities. We haven't been farmers for four generations. We do have a pot to piss in - about $7.5 million net worth, just over $400,000 in HHI - but the money is not the point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm UMC because of my SES, particularly my educational level, not because of my income or net worth.

Grey Gardens types. You see these adjunct professors loading up their 30-year-old Volvos and Saabs outside of Trader Joe's. They don't have a pot to piss in, but they're desperate to think of themselves as UMC.

Anonymous wrote:Top 1 percent is a huge difference between high and low. My old boss made 5 million a year yet felt poor. In the tip 1 percent he is lumped with folks making 500 million plus a year