State with highest average household income is, surprisingly, New Jersey: $66,752. (I’d have thought Connecticut [due to wealthy metro NYC suburbanites] or Virginia [due to wealthy metro DC suburbanites].)Mississippi is, not surprisingly, lowest: $34,340. .
[/QUOTE]
New Jersey is probably the only state where the entire populace is living in the metro area of two of the largest metropolitans areas in the country: New York and Philadelphia. The entire state is part of a huge overlapping metropolitan area, and North Jersey is becoming a metropolitan area in its own right.
That number is not that surprising when you think of it that way. Every citizen in the state has the ability to commute and work in a major metropolitan area.
The better definition nowadays concerning working people is about choices. Do you command enough resources, whether money, reputation, professional qualifications, work experience or entreprenureal skills that you meet most or all of the following criteria:
You can more or less choose where you want to live - if you want to live in a detached house in a good neighbourhood, you can;
You do not fear being laid off, because you know that you have resources to draw on and a skill or qualifications that will ensure another job;
You have crossed the line inbetween “people are doing you a favour by giving you work” and “you are doing people a favour by agreeing to look into their problems for them”;
You can pretty well buy whatever clothes, jewelry, electronics, cars, vacations, and other toys and games that you want - what is stopping you is financial prudence or the desire to increase investments, not lack of money;
Childcare. Can you afford whatever childcare set up you want (such as a live-in nanny, a paid for preschool);
The other mistake people make is to confuse income with wealth. There are plenty of people with six figure incomes that have a negative net worth and live paycheck to paycheck and juggle credit cards. And if they lose their job, they’re screwed. Such people can’t be considered rich, because even though they are in the top 5% income range their lifestyle is unsustainable and they are living on borrowed financial time.
[QUOTE=Lemur866]
The other mistake people make is to confuse income with wealth. There are plenty of people with six figure incomes that have a negative net worth and live paycheck to paycheck and juggle credit cards. And if they lose their job, they’re screwed. Such people can’t be considered rich, because even though they are in the top 5% income range their lifestyle is unsustainable and they are living on borrowed financial time.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Capt. Ridley’s Shooting Party]
I had a friend, as an undergraduate, who went to Kings, Canterbury. I was completely unaware until we started talking about intramural school sports (or something like that), and he mentioned that his “house” had once been the site of parliament in 1470!
[/QUOTE]
Well, Mrs. Homie and I make within a few dollars of the median family income for Sangamon County, Illinois. But then again, Sangamon County, Illinois is a different matter from, say, Wessex County, New York.
We’re definitely upper lower class, no doubt about it. We live in a trailer, fer Pete’s sake!
Right now I’m middle class, but a few years ago, I was fucking poor. I mean, “shall we buy medicine or food this week because we can’t afford both.” (We also had no health insurance. Most low-end jobs either don’t offer health insurance or offer it at such high prices that it absorbs most of your salary.)
It sucked. It absolutely sucked. Middle class is heaven compared to being poor, and it sucks, too, in many respects.
I have participated in several threads where various posters have admitted to being wealthy, in the sense of having lots more income than they needed to get by. And by get by they meant nice house, vacations, cars, no need to work, etc., not “week’s worth of ramen noodles and a block of frozen squid.”
Over here the Baby Bonus (a 5k incentive/subsidy given to people who have a baby) will start to be means-tested and will no longer be given to households earning over 150k. It’s sparked some discussion about middle class welfare and whether 150k means you’re rich or “doing it tough every day” like one such family claimed.
The median income is somewhere around 60k and the average house is around 400k. A household income of 150k puts you squarely in the middle class here. To live an upper-middle class lifestyle (kids in private school, house in a blue chip suburb, European cars, holiday house, overseas vacations) easily requires an income of 400k+. You’re probably moving from upper-middle class to just plain rich when your million dollar plus house (and you’d be surprised how little that buys you in some suburbs) doesn’t make up the bulk of your net worth.
In income, some years we’re upper class, but we sure as hell don’t have all kinds of extra money floating around. My husband works in commission sales which makes his income vary, and I don’t work. My husband’s alma mater (which he and his sister both attended) costs somewhere in the neighbourhood of $17,000 per year. When we can send our kids to St. Paul’s, then I’ll consider us rich.
Grew up lower class most of my life (with a single mom occasionally on welfare and donations). The first 10 years of my adult life were either as a starving student, or a starving temp worker.
I’ve since clawed my way into white collar professional and would consider myself lower-middle to middle-middle (own a house and car, but not much room for luxuries, have to scrimp and save if I want a vacation anywhere).
[QUOTE=Kayeby]
Over here the Baby Bonus (a 5k incentive/subsidy given to people who have a baby) will start to be means-tested and will no longer be given to households earning over 150k. It’s sparked some discussion about middle class welfare and whether 150k means you’re rich or “doing it tough every day” like one such family claimed.
The median income is somewhere around 60k and the average house is around 400k. A household income of 150k puts you squarely in the middle class here. To live an upper-middle class lifestyle (kids in private school, house in a blue chip suburb, European cars, holiday house, overseas vacations) easily requires an income of 400k+. You’re probably moving from upper-middle class to just plain rich when your million dollar plus house (and you’d be surprised how little that buys you in some suburbs) doesn’t make up the bulk of your net worth.
I also found these US figures interesting:
[/QUOTE]
Heh, those figures are quite interesting. Shocking how low the median net worth figures are.
Equally shocking, as in unrealistic, the savings goals of formulas generated by the linked site.
This assumes you save 10% of your current pretax income for each and every year of your life - a nonsense goal, especially for younger professionals earning a high wage … as they haven’t been earning it very long.
